answered and said: Thou art Christ the Son of the living God. And
Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona:
because flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My
Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That them art Peter;
and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of
the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth,
it shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose
on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."
In this magnificent promise, Jesus Christ evidently declares His
intention to delegate supreme power to St. Peter, and constitute
him His Vicar in the Christian Church.
This supreme power is signified by a double metaphor, viz., a
__foundation__ and __keys__. First, He says: "Thou art
Peter; and on this rock I will build My Church." In order to
understand the force of this declaration, it is necessary to call
to mind that the name of Peter, which signifies Rock, was not the
proper name of the Apostle. His name was Simon. The Lord gave him
the name of Peter when He first called him to the apostleship, as
an appellation significant of his character and office in the
Church.
{203}
But it was on the occasion of his noble confession of Christ,
made by a special inspiration of the Holy Ghost, that He first
announced the full import of that mysterious name. St. Peter
said, "Thou art Christ"--by this title, which signifies the
Anointed One, acknowledging all those divine attributes and
prerogatives which are implied in the character of the Messiah of
God and Redeemer of the world. The Lord replied in a manner
denoting the solemnity of the occasion, and speaking with all the
dignity and authority of a Legislator and a Prophet, by
conferring on St. Peter, in return for the honor which he had
just rendered Him, the highest honor which was in His gift: "Thou
art Peter [i.e., a Rock]: and on this Rock I will build My
Church." The plain and natural sense of these words of Christ is,
that He appoints Peter to occupy a position in the spiritual
edifice of the Church corresponding to that occupied by a
foundation in a material building. The foundation sustains and,
as it were, rules the whole edifice--__i.e.__, by its strength
it keeps the whole building in order, and every portion of it in
its proper place, thus keeping it from crumbling into ruin--and
losing all structural form in a mass of shattered fragments. The
foundation is to the building the principle of its unity, repose,
order, and durability.
{204}
Therefore, Peter must be the same to the Church. By him the
Church must be sustained, ruled, kept in order, and prevented
from falling in pieces, and thus losing its organic form. His
authority must be the principle of its unity, strength, and
perpetuity. All the force of its laws must be derived from him,
and all its authority must ultimately rest on him as its final
ground and basis. This is the first portion of our Lord's divine
decree concerning St. Peter. Let us now examine the second.
"I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Among
the principal nations of antiquity, and particularly among the
Hebrews, it was a received usage that the tradition of the keys
denoted the transfer or acknowledgment of supreme power over the
house, citadel, or city to whose gates they belonged. These keys,
when made of precious metal, and, as was often the case, richly
ornamented, were a symbol of power and dignity, and carried only
by kings, princes, and magistrates. In the Hebrew monarchy, the
chief of the royal household, who was a kind of grand chancellor
of the kingdom, or vicar of the king, carried a large key on his
shoulder as a badge of his office.
{205}
In the Prophecy of Isaias,[C. xxii.] we read this prediction
concerning Eliacim, son of the high-priest Helcias: "I will place
upon his shoulder the key of the house of David, and he shall
open and there shall be no one who shall shut, and he shall shut
and there shall be no one who shall open, and he shall be on the
throne of glory of his father's house."
This probably signifies that Eliacim should become high-priest in
his father's place; and gives us a plain proof that the keys were
an emblem of the sovereign pontificate in the Jewish Church. In
the Apocalypse of St. John, the same emblem of the keys is used
to designate the sovereign pontificate of Jesus Christ Himself:
"These things saith the Holy One and the True One, He that hath
the key of David; He that openeth, and no man shutteth; shutteth,
and no man openeth." [Footnote 81]
[Footnote 81: Apoc. iii. 7.]
[USCCB: Revelation iii. 7.]
Our Lord, as the lineal descendant of David, was the lawful King
of the Jews, and this royal lineage according to earthly and
temporal laws, was typical of His inherent royalty as the Son of
God. Therefore, the key of David, or the outward and visible sign
of David's royalty, is taken as expressive of His supreme
dominion as Lord and Redeemer of the world. When Christ promised
to give the keys of the kingdom of heaven--the keys of His own
kingdom, and the symbols of His own Sovereignty--to St. Peter, He
must have intended to delegate that sovereignty to him, and to
constitute him His Vicar on the earth: To make it still more
plain that He meant this, our Lord made a distinct and express
declaration to this effect, in these words: "And whatsoever thou
shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven; and
whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also
in heaven."
{206}
These words designate the plenitude of power to be conferred on
St. Peter, of making laws, and binding the consciences of all to
observe them, punishing transgressors, abrogating these same laws
and pardoning offenders, and doing whatever else the good of the
Church or its individual members may require, according to the
diversity of times and circumstances. Jesus Christ gives before
hand the seal and warrant of His divine authority to all these
laws. This is what is called, in the language of commerce and
politics, giving __carte blanche__. King Charles V. of Spain,
when he sent commissioners to America to inquire into the abuses
and cruelties perpetrated by the avaricious Spanish colonists
against the Indians, gave them a number of blank sheets already
signed and sealed with the royal sign-manual, that they might
promulgate royal edicts according to their own judgment. In the
same way, Jesus Christ promises that He will give to St. Peter
this unlimited power of exercising jurisdiction, in His name, in
the Catholic Church, with the sealed sign-manual of heaven.
{207}
But Jesus Christ not only promised to bestow this power on St.
Peter: He made to him, after His resurrection and before His
ascension, a formal grant of this power, and solemnly delivered
up the care and government of His universal flock into his hands.
This fact is recorded by St. John, in the twenty-first chapter of
his Gospel. Everything about this chapter is mysterious and
sublime in the highest degree, and every word, every
circumstance, points to that high office of the Chief Pastor,
and, after Christ, principal founder of the Christian religion,
which was given to St. Peter.
It was an awful moment; like that mysterious and solemn period of
twilight, when the sun has set, but still leaves some lingering
gleam of his light behind him, before the dark hour of night
draws on, and the milder and fainter radiance of the moon
succeeds to the brightness of day--the brief period of transition
from day to night--from light to darkness--the holiest hour of
the day, when the soul, as it were, naturally withdraws from the
world towards God and heaven. Such a moment had now come in the
progress of time, the twilight of the world. Jesus Christ, the
Light of the world--the Sun of Justice, who had risen in the East
with healing in his beams--had gone down to the grave, had closed
His earthly career, and the world henceforth, so long illuminated
by the presence of the bright Sun of truth and grace, would have
no longer any other light to shine upon it except the reflected
light of the Catholic Church.
{208}
The time of night and of the absence of Jesus Christ from His
disciples was approaching. And yet He was not altogether
withdrawn. Still, in His spiritual and glorified body, He
lingered on the earth, coming and going, approaching and
vanishing before His disciples. He was still with them, but no
longer as an inhabitant of the earth, but of heaven. At this time
it was that St. Peter said to his fellow-disciples, "I go
a-fishing." Who can fail to see here, with all the wisest and
holiest interpreters of the Scripture, a mysterious foreshadowing
of that great fishery for the souls of men, in which the
Apostolic net was to draw so many into the Church? It was Peter
who was the leader and chief here, and by his orders the nets
were cast. Suddenly, Jesus Christ appeared standing on the shore,
and commanded them to cast their nets on the right side of the
boat. They did so, and, although they had before this caught
nothing, their net was immediately so filled with large fishes
that they could not draw it. It required the assistance of all
those who were on board several other boats to draw the net. And
yet, when the Lord commanded some of these fishes to be brought,
St. Peter, alone, went and drew the net up on the beach.
{209}
Evidently do these emblematic events indicate St. Peter as the
one who should command the ship of the Church, and preside over
the grand fishery of souls, and by his supernatural power should
pull the net by which the elect of God were drawn from the waves
of perdition to the shore of eternal life.
Jesus Christ assembled His disciples around Him on the beach, by
the seaside, and they dined together from the fish which they had
taken. Then, when this mysterious meal, the parting banquet of
Jesus and His disciples, was finished, the Lord exacted from St.
Peter three times a profession of his love, and of his peculiar
love--a love greater than that of the other Apostles. "Simon
Peter, lovest thou Me more than these?" And thrice He gave him
the solemn charge: "Feed My lambs. ... Feed My lambs. ... Feed My
sheep." In these words, Jesus Christ evidently committed not one
or the other portion of His flock, but His entire flock, all His
people, the universal Church throughout the world, to his
pastoral care. The expression, "Feed My lambs--feed My sheep,"
indicates much more than simply to give them their food, namely,
by teaching salutary doctrine. Two different words are used in
the original Greek, [Greek text]; which is literally in Latin,
__Pasce in cibo, agnos meos__--Feed My lambs.
{210}
But after using this expression, which indicates the tender and
paternal care of the pastoral office, He uses another expressing
its authority, [Greek text]; this signifies, as a learned
theologian (Perrone) remarks, __pascere cum imperio, pascere
præsidendo__, to feed by ruling, to feed by presiding, or to
feed, rule, and preside over at the same time, as a shepherd over
his flock. This is in accordance with the usage of ancient
writers and the Scriptures.
In Homer and other ancient authors, kings are called shepherds or
pastors, and __poimaine__, feed, signifies to rule or exercise
kingly authority. In these words, then, Jesus Christ constituted
St. Peter chief pastor and supreme ruler over His universal
flock--sheep and lambs together; not merely the lambs, who
represent the laity, but the sheep, those to whom the lambs are
subject, and by whom they are fed--that is, the bishops and
pastors of the Church. It is in vain that the enemies of St.
Peter's chair exert all their ingenuity to escape the force of
these passages. They are too plain and clear to be evaded, and,
after centuries of exertion to heave the Rock of Peter out of the
Scriptures, there it stands, an immovable and unquestionable fact
that the Rock of Peter is the foundation of the Catholic Church,
that the Catholic Church is built on the Rock of Peter, that
Peter received the keys of heaven from Jesus Christ, and was
constituted by Him chief pastor over His universal flock.
{211}
And here allow me to remark how singular it is that Protestants
should be ready to build up with out hesitation a vast pyramid of
doctrine on the narrow foundation of a few texts of Scripture,
and at the same time reject the most clear and unequivocal
statements of the New Testament. For example, they will most
positively assert the transfer of the Sabbath from Saturday to
Sunday, because the word Lord's Day is once used, and the
assembling of the faithful on the first day of the week is once
casually mentioned, although nothing is said of their being an
observance of divine obligation intended to supersede the
Sabbath. They will prove the baptism of infants from the
circumcision of Jewish children, and from the fact that some
entire families were baptized, although there is no evidence that
there were any infants in these families. Some will prove
Episcopacy, and others Presbyterianism, and others
Congregationalism, from the Scriptures. And yet they will reject
without hesitation the evidence of the supremacy of Peter, which
is so clear that even some Protestants are forced to admit it in
a partial sense; and the celebrated Jewish infidel Salvador, a
man who perhaps excels all the modern advocates of infidelity in
perspicacity of intellect and ingenuity of reasoning, declares
with out hesitation that the supremacy of the See of St. Peter is
an institution of Jesus Christ, and an essential part of
Christianity.
{212}
It is one among many proofs that those who profess to make the
Bible their only rule do not really derive their doctrine from a
candid examination of the Scriptures; but that they receive what
they have been taught by their parents and religious teachers,
and search the Scriptures to find proof and confirmation of these
doctrines. Thus, each one, in stead of conforming his belief to
the Scripture, bends the Scripture into conformity with his
belief. Those parts of the Scripture which are not easily bent
into this conformity remain to him a dead letter, they make no
impression on his mind, and, no matter how clear and plain they
may be, he forgets them if he can, and, if he is forced to pay
attention to them, he explains them away. Thus it has been with
the passages of the New Testament which prove so clearly the
supremacy of St. Peter. There is nothing in the New Testament
more clear, more plain, more explicit, more obvious, than this
supremacy; when these various passages have been once collated,
placed in juxtaposition with each other, carefully examined and
reflected on, and confronted with the great fact of the perpetual
existence of the supremacy of the Roman Pontiffs as the
acknowledged successors of St. Peter. This last topic I have not
directly considered in this discourse, but have reserved it for
another.
{213}
Nevertheless, whoever will attentively consider what is involved
in the very idea of St. Peter's supremacy will see at once that
this supremacy must be, by its very nature, perpetual. It was
made the foundation of a perpetual structure; it extended over
all bishops and all the faithful, without any limit of time or
place; it provided for the exercise of that power of the keys
which is necessary in all ages; and it was made the means of
keeping the rulers of the Church in unity of faith under the
severest assaults of Satan, which are undoubtedly those of the
last days of the world.
Our Lord in establishing the supremacy of St. Peter gave to His
Church a constitution and a government. He placed His kingdom
under one monarchical head. He made the sacerdotal hierarchy
subject to one chief. This law must therefore last as long as the
Church lasts, that is, through all time. There is no power which
can change the divine law of our Lord. The supremacy of St. Peter
must therefore be perpetual in his successors. And that these
successors are the Roman Pontiffs I shall proceed to show in my
next discourse.
----------------------------
{214}
Sermon XIV.
The Roman Pontiffs
The Successors Of St. Peter.
St. Matt. xvi. 18.
"__And I say to thee:
That thou art Peter;
and upon this Rock I will build My Church__."
I have proved in a former discourse that St. Peter was
constituted Prince of the Apostles and Vicar of Jesus Christ,
with supreme jurisdiction over the Catholic Church, by the Lord
Himself. It remains now to show that this supremacy was given
also to the successors of St. Peter, and that the Bishops of Rome
are his successors, and consequently inherit his supremacy. That
the Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church is the See of St.
Peter, and the Mother and Mistress of Churches; and that the
Bishop of Rome is the Vicar of Christ, and Supreme Visible Head
of the Church--this is what I now undertake to prove.
{215}
This is proved, in the first place, by an argument, the force of
which is admitted in all courts of law, viz., the argument of
__prescription__. The Roman Church is in possession of this
claim, and has been from time immemorial. A claim on a certain
property or to a certain right, which is so ancient that the mind
of man runneth not to the contrary, is always admitted as valid
in a law court. Now, it is evident that the Roman Church now
asserts this claim; that she asserted it before the Reformation;
that she asserted it before the Greek schism; and that not a
single Church exists in the world which has not at some time
admitted this claim, and submitted to it. If we go back, then, to
the earlier centuries, we find the Roman Church always in
possession of this supremacy, and we can never find its
beginning. Protestants and others, who wish to prove that it
began after the Apostolic age, can never agree together as to the
epoch of the rise of the Papal power, although all give it a very
early date. Now, I say that, according to all sound principles of
reasoning, the fact that this claim had been made and assented to
from time immemorial is a certain proof that it is just. It could
not have been established so early and so universally without
violence and without resistance, unless it existed under the
Apostles, and was established by them in the infancy of
Christianity.
{216}
Just as it would be impossible for the Governor of Virginia to
take peaceable possession of the Presidential chair and govern
the United States, as its acknowledged chief magistrate, without
any election of the people; so it would have been equally
impossible for the Bishop of Rome to make himself peaceably the
supreme ruler of the Catholic Church, unless he were appointed by
St. Peter and the Apostles, according to the divine constitution
of the grand Christian commonwealth, with the knowledge of all
Christians. This argument alone would be perfectly conclusive,
even if the New Testament were altogether lost, or were entirely
silent on the subject.
But when we compare the fact that the Roman Church, under the
name of the See of St. Peter, has always existed as the principal
edifice of a vast agglomeration of smaller but similar edifices,
with the prophecy of Christ that He would build the Church on the
Rock of Peter, the conclusion is irresistible that the fact is
the fulfilment of the prophecy. Here is the prophecy of Christ,
that He would build His Church on Peter as a foundation, and that
the gates of hell should not prevail against it. There is the
Roman Church, evidently built on Peter as its foundation, which
has endured through eighteen centuries, and is now as firm and
immovable as ever. It is impossible to escape the conclusion that
this is the Church built by Christ. The fact corresponds exactly
with the prophecy, and there is no other fact which does,
therefore the fact is the fulfilment of the prophecy.
{217}
Let me illustrate this by a comparison. Suppose you describe the
Moro of Havana to some one who has never seen it, and who is
about taking a voyage to Cuba. You tell him it is a castle of
large size and great strength, built on a rock which rises
perpendicularly from the sea, at the mouth of the bay. There is
no castle similar to it: on his route. Now, when this traveller
comes on deck some morning, and sees a castle founded on a rock
at the mouth of a harbor, with a large city in the distance, is
it not evident that this is the Moro? If you sail from the city
of New York, knowing that there is an American ship of the line
anchored in the bay, and you pass a large man-of-war with the
United States flag, and the broad pennant of an admiral flying at
her mast-head, is it not evident that this is the ship in
question? Though a hundred smaller vessels are anchored in the
vicinity, you cannot hesitate a moment, you can not for an
instant imagine that any of these is a man-of-war. The first
glance tells you which is the line-of-battle ship, for there is
only one which makes any pretension to that character, which has
the size, the armament, or in any aspect the appearance of a
man-of-war.
{218}
Precisely so it is with the Roman Church, which professes to be
the See of Peter, the only one which bases a claim of universal
jurisdiction on the supremacy of Peter; which pretends
[puts forward a claim] to be the ship of Peter, and to bear his
standard. It is unique, unrivalled, and alone in its character
and claims. It must be, then, that Church which the Lord promised
to build on the rock of Peter, with such immovable firmness that
all the assaults of hell could never overthrow it; it must be
that Church which the Lord committed to the guidance of Peter,
and which is destined to outride all the storms of time. But,
although I consider that the claim of the Roman Church to
supremacy is fully proved by this argument from prescription, I
will not confine myself to it, but proceed to adduce some
positive testimonies. The perpetuity of St. Peter's supremacy in
the Church can be clearly proved from Scripture, and the fact
that the Bishops of Rome have inherited this supremacy is not
only evident from the fact that no other supremacy has ever
existed, but from a clear chain of historical facts and
evidences, running back to the very age of the Apostles.
In the first place, it is clear from the Scripture that St.
Peter's supremacy was to continue. A number of the ablest
Protestant writers have proved most conclusively what is called
the Apostolic succession, that is, that Bishops are the
successors of the Apostles, tracing their authority and descent
in an unbroken line of ordination to the Apostles. This is
perfectly evident from the commission of Jesus Christ to the
eleven Apostles:
{219}
"Going therefore teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching
them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and
behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the
world." [Footnote 82]
[Footnote 82: Matt. xxviii. 19.]
[USCCB: Matt. xxviii. 19-20.]
If the Apostles by virtue of the commission of Jesus Christ were
the perpetual pastors of the Church, and enjoy the perpetual
presence of Jesus Christ to the end of time, the Apostolic office
is by its own nature perpetual in the Church, and the original
Apostles have been succeeded by others. For the same reason, the
office of Prince of Apostles must be perpetual. The plenitude of
the Apostleship was given to St. Peter alone, under the
similitude of the keys, and afterwards the same power was given
to the others by participation and in subordination to him. The
supremacy of the chief enters, then, into the primary
constitution of the Apostolate or Catholic Episcopate, as one of
its essential and component parts, and is therefore perpetual.
Jesus Christ committed the government of His Church to one
supreme Ruler, whose authority was signified by the symbol of the
keys. He committed His flock to one chief Pastor, when He said to
St. Peter: "Feed my lambs--feed my sheep."
{220}
If, therefore, the authority of St. Peter expired with his
person, then a total and fundamental change took place after his
death in the constitution and government of the Church, a
supposition not to be admitted for one moment without clear
evidence. But there is none such. On the contrary, our Lord
declares without distinction or limitation that "there shall be
one fold and one shepherd." [Footnote 83]
[Footnote 83: John x. 16.]