There are many aspects of Catholicism that distinguish it
from other forms of Christianity: differences of dogma, style and understanding
of worship, and how we translate our faith into action (as well as the fact
that we believe we must do so). But I am
not a theologian, though my mom would probably beg to differ (czesc mamusiu!). Therefore, in this mini-series, I
will focus only on those aspects that present the biggest differences (papacy, Mary, Eucharist).
Why do I believe that the Pope holds an office that was instituted by Christ Himself?
Well, in John 21:17, Jesus addresses Peter (still called
Simon) with this directive: “tend my sheep”.
In Luke 22:32, Jesus tells Peter to “strengthen [his] brothers”, as one
in a role of authority would do. And
throughout the gospels, Peter is always listed first among the apostles. But I want to focus on my own sense of why I
believe that the papacy is in Christ’s plan for His church, so for a more theological discussion of the papacy, see here.
I believe it makes sense that Christ would
leave his followers a clear system by which future generations can come to know
Him. This is in stark
contrast to the notion of sola scriptura, which means “only Scripture” in
Latin, and refers to the idea that Christian faith ought to be based only on
what is contained in the Bible, and not on the tradition of the church. But Jesus didn't write the
Bible; it was the early Church Fathers who, inspired by the Holy Spirit,
recorded Jesus's life and teachings for us. The
Bible is not a how-to book, written with self-explanatory language geared
towards the masses, consistently made up of a single genre, or contextualized
within a single and familiar world-view that is easily accessible to all
readers.
When we read something, we automatically interpret the words
on the page based on our prior knowledge of the subject matter, our knowledge
of how language works, and the context of what is written. We do not live in a vacuum, and we do not
read in a vacuum. There are as many
interpretations of the Bible as there are readers. Not all of them can be correct. Therefore, it makes sense that Christ
anticipated this conundrum and therefore organized a church tasked with the
difficult job of biblical scholarship and translation of biblical truths into
laymen’s terms.
In a democracy, we abide by the laws that
have been put in place by those who have been entrusted with their institution
and interpretation. Even when we believe
that we know better than those in positions of authority, we don’t rise up in
anarchy and declare independence every time we disagree with something being
put forth by our government. So why do
we act like this when it comes to religion?
Think about how many denominations there are. Every time a group of Christians disagrees
with their pastor over something, there is a danger that they will splinter off
and start their own church. How do they
know that they are right and their church of origin is not?
I do believe that there are things that are
right for one person but wrong for another person to do. For instance, some people are called to
married life, while others are called to the priesthood or religious life. People are called to various ministries and
if they resist and try to do something different, however note-worthy that
other option may be, it is wrong for them to disobey God’s call.
But what is right and what is true are two
different things. There are some things that are universally true, meaning they
apply to everyone.
Given only a Bible, each Christian turns to
Scripture in prayer, and essentially trusts their own interpretation of
whatever verses come to them as the truth.
With this system in place, some people will interpret an unborn baby
worth protecting at all costs, while others will see her only as a potential
baby (whatever that means), and therefore able to be disposed of if it becomes
inconvenient to treat her as the human being she is. They may even point to the same Scriptures (for
instance, Psalm 139:13, Isaiah 44:2, Jeremiah 1:5) to explain their polar
views. Some people will point out that
God creates us in the womb as a whole, while others will say that God creates our bodies
first, and then inserts our soul (apparently at birth), which gives us human worth.
Both of these views cannot be correct. This is why I believe it is necessary to have
a source of authority that is able to dedicate enough time, scholarship, and
discernment to make definitive statements correctly interpreting these various
verses so that we may know how to please God by doing what He would have us
do. In this case, the Catholic church,
under the guidance and leadership of the pope and the council of bishops, inspired
by the Holy Spirit in the same way as the first apostles and disciples were
inspired by Him at Pentecost, take the guesswork out of the seemingly
contradictory ways of viewing Scripture.
The bottom line is that the Bible’s message is NOT self-evident, so to
think that it is sufficient to read one’s Bible without the input of the
religious authority of the pope is folly.
But what’s the difference between deferring
to the pope for the interpretation of a difficult scripture versus one’s
pastor? Well, there are about as many
biblical interpretations as there are pastors. And who gave them the authority to make such
interpretations to begin with? The pope
has the benefit of an unbroken line of apostolic succession, going all the way
back to Christ’s original apostles. The
RCC has been consistent about its teachings over the years, even when those
teachings have been unpopular or difficult.
Consistency to me sounds like the work of the Holy Spirit.
I recently heard a radio sermon on how
Christians are not to consume any alcohol under any circumstances. The pastor cited various Scriptures (Luke
1:15, 7:33; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Habakkuk 2:15; Proverbs 23:30-31) to show how
drinking alcoholic beverages, including wine, is an abomination before God,
failing to mention how Jesus chose to
perform His first miracle precisely by brining into being wine where there
wasn’t any (John 2:1-11). He also failed
to mention how Jesus used bread and wine at His last supper (Mark 14:23-24,
Matthew 26:2-28, Luke 22:20), and asked His disciples to do likewise (1 Corinthians 11:25).
For these reasons, I believe that the papacy
was instituted by Christ as a way of keeping His flock on the
straight-and-narrow path, undisturbed by misinterpretations of Scripture. The
pope is not perfect, of course, as he is only a human being. But his office is blessed with the grace of
infallibility, that is, a guarantee that the Holy Spirit will guide and inspire
whoever holds this office into all truth and righteousness. I don’t have to like the pope to respect his
authority, and by so doing, I respect Christ’s decision to establish His church
the way that He did, with a visible head of the pope in the papacy, begun with St.
Peter.
Matthew 16:18
You are Peter, and upon this rock I will
build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
No comments:
Post a Comment