Transcription
What if I told you that some of the best arguments for the papacy and some of the best smackdowns against objections to the papacy were written 800 years ago by St. Thomas Aquinas.
Welcome to eternal Christendom, consecrated to our lady for the glory of our Lord. I'm Joshua Charles. excited to do another papacy episode today. So in this episode we'll present the brief argument for the papacy from the greatest Catholic theologian of course St. Thomas Aquinas. And this argument comes from the suma contragentilace book four chapter 76. The suma contraentil is basically a book where St. Thomas refutes various pagan errors, heretical errors, Islamic errors and whatnot. It's a wonderful apologetics book. So I highly recommend you get it if you've not read it. It's actually I would say it's a little bit easier to read and understand than the suma theologia which is his more famous work perhaps but the suma contraentilles is just wonderful. So this comes from book four chapter 76. So we are labeling it brief not only because of its brevity but because it does not include all of St. Thomas's defenses of the papacy but as always we stand in awe of how concise, logical and biblical St. Thomas always is including in this argument.
So today's road map is as follows. St. Thomas's thesis is that the papacy was divinely instituted by Christ which he proves by making four arguments and answering two objections. They are as follows. Argument number one, as local Christians have local heads in their bishops, so too does the whole Christian people have a universal head in the pope. Argument number two, there must always be a way to authoritatively resolve disputes about the faith for all Christians. Argument number three, the best form of government for the sake of peace and unity is ruled by one, not by many. Argument number four, the church on earth is an imitation of the church in heaven, which has one head. Obviously, that's Christ. And then he addresses two objections. The first objection is Christ is the chief shepherd and therefore St. Peter isn't. The second objection is St. Peter does not have successors. And then we will conclude with a summary of St. Thomas's arguments. And as you could probably tell from those objections, those are very common arguments to this very day. So not all the not not any of this is new. Uh you'll hear very many Protestants, some Eastern Orthodox to this very day. And uh as I say, it's a one niner which is Ecclesiastes 1:9. It's my reference to Ecclesiastes 1:9, which is uh says there's nothing new under the sun.
So, before we get into the substance of the podcast, I just wanted to thank all of our patrons. You are what make this possible. Eternal Christianom possible. Uh we've got more progress to make, but guess what? If a thousand Catholics gave $25 a month, Eternal Christendom, as we are currently constituted with two full-time team members, a podcast producer, a graphic design artist, would be fully funded indefinitely. a thousand Catholics, $25 a month. So, if you have loved our content, if if you've shared it with friends and family, um please consider becoming a patron if you are not already, you can go to our website, eternalchristum.com, go to the top right, it says become a patron. And there are actually multiple ways you can give to eternal Christ as a patron. We've got a big vision. We're creating five masterpieces. This podcast is only number one, but we are working on things behind the scenes to start getting work on the other ones. check out our homepage for more details about those. But uh we are very excited and we are so thankful for all of you who are already patrons. But for those of you who are not, if you're blessed by our content, please consider supporting it. It takes a lot of time, a lot of effort. We're trying to do things at a very very high level. And none of that is for free. So please be please consider becoming a patron. Thank you very much.
All right. So getting into the substance of St. Thomas's argument. Argument number one, local Christians local heads and all Christians have one head. So St. Thomas's first argument is as follows. Quote, "Now although the people are distributed among various dascese and cities, nevertheless there is but one church and therefore only one Christian people. Consequently, just as a bishop is appointed as the head of a certain people and a particular church, so must the whole Christian people be subject to one who is the head of the whole church."
So this argument from St. Thomas essentially relies on the basic reality that virtually all Christians had always known and accepted, namely that the church is governed by the successors of the apostles, the bishops. Since local Christians require a head for their own governance, the same principle necessarily applies at the universal level. There is no reason to think Christians require only local governance since they are part of a society, the church, that extends far beyond just the local. In my own articulation of why I believe in the divine establishment of the papacy, often when people ask why it did not become Eastern Orthodox, I summarize it in three points: logic, scripture, and history. This first argument from St. Thomas relates to my first point, namely logic. This point is essentially that all societies of any kind require a head for the direction of their affairs. This is really political philosophy 101. If a society exists, it has a head of some kind. There is no society, whether angels in heaven, the family, a company, a nation, a parish, a dascese, or so much as a club etc. that lacks a head who possesses some form of jurisdiction over the members of that society such that they have a right to command and the other members have a duty to obey. The same is true of Christ's church at the universal level. If all Christians are part of one visible universal society, then it necessarily follows that this society must have a head. As St. Thomas points out if Christians require heads at the local level in the persons of their bishops, they require a head at the universal level as well. To claim that there is no universal head of all Christians would be the equivalent of saying Christians do not all belong to the same universal society.
That gets us to argument number two, resolving disputes about the faith for all Christians. So St. Thomas's second argument is as follows. Quote, "Again, the unity of the church requires that all the faithful be of one faith. Now, questions tend to arise about matters of faith, and the church would be divided by differences of opinion unless its unity were safeguarded by the pronouncements of one. Therefore, in order to safeguard the unity of the church, it is necessary that there be one who presides over the whole church."
Now, Christ loved the church and shed his blood for her. Therefore, he did not fail her in her needs, seeing that it is said, even of the synagogue, quote, "What more was there to do for my vineyard that I have not done in it," unquote. That's Isaiah 5:4. Continuing with St. Thomas, there could be no doubt, therefore, that Christ provided his church with a head.
So, the second argument from St. Thomas is closely related to the first. Societies do not have heads to aggrandise the heads. Rather, they have heads in order to properly govern the body of their members. The head exists for the body, not the body for the head. We know from scripture that there is only one body and one spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and father of us all. That's quoting Ephesians 4 4-6. We also know from history both in scripture itself and since the time of the apostles that disputes about the one faith have been a permanent fact of life for the church. In order for such disputes to be settled so that all Christians may publicly profess the same faith. There must be an authority in the church that can publicly settle such disputes. There were no Protestants around when St. Thomas was alive. What he likely had in mind was the schismatic Greek church, which today we call the Eastern Orthodox. Since both sides of that schism acknowledge the authority of the episcopacy, the office of bishop as successor of the apostles, the point St. Thomas is making is most relevant to disputes between bishops themselves. If bishops are disputing with one another about the faith, how can their disputes ultimately be resolved? The Catholic answer of St. Thomas is the papacy. There must be one bishop who is head of all in order to resolve conflicts among bishops. The buck must stop somewhere. In making this argument, St. Thomas is doing nothing more than repeating a truth articulated by many church fathers. Namely, that the papacy exists in order to remove the very possibility of schism, just as the office of bishop exists at the local level in order to remove the same possibility of schism at the local level. That does not mean that schisms never happen. It simply means that in principle Christ has provided his church with the means to avoid it. A few examples from the church fathers all acknowledge as saints by the Eastern Orthodox. Illustrating this principle would be helpful before moving on to St. Thomas's third argument.
So for example, St. Jerome observes in against Joinianis book 1 section 26 he observes the following quote. "But you say the church was founded upon Peter, although elsewhere the same is attributed to all the apostles, and they all receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of the church depends upon them all alike. Yet one among the 12 is chosen so that when a head has been appointed, there may be no occasion for schism." So you hear that language, no occasion for schism. And St. Jerome is very aware of many occasions of schism. He had to deal with some of it himself. So, it's not that no schism happens. That that clearly isn't the case. We see examples of that in the Old Testament as well where people were breaking away from Moses and whatnot despite the fact that Moses was the divinely constituted head.
So, let's move on to another example. Likewise, from St. Upus of Milvis, I think it's Milvis. I may be mis mispronouncing it, but forgive me if I am. But St. Upus of Milvis observed the following in against the Donatus book two section two. Quote, "Therefore, you cannot deny that you know the first Episcopal Sea was set up in Rome, which was occupied by Peter, the head of all the apostles, for which reason he was called Cphus, so that in this one sea unity might be preserved by all, lest each of the other apostles should maintain his own. Thus, anyone who set up another sea against this one sea would be a schismatic and a sinner." unquote. Similarly, St. Pope Galatius observed as follows, quote, "Was it that the rest of the holy and blessed apostles were not closed with his referring to Peter's virtue? Who dare assert this? No, but that by a head being constituted, the occasion of schism might be removed." He's using virtually identical language as St. Jerome.
So, with that, we move on to St. Thomas's third argument. Argument number three, the best form of government is ruled by one for the sake of peace and unity. So St. Thomas's third argument is as follows. Quoting from St. Thomas, quote, "Further, we cannot doubt that the government of the church was perfectly provided for since it was devised by one through whom kings reign and rulers decree what is just." That's quoting Proverbs 8:15, continuing with St. Thomas. "Now, the best form of government is when a people is governed by one. For it is clear that government's end is peace. For peace and unity of the subjects is the end of the governing authority, and unity is more fittingly ensured by one than by many. Therefore, the government of the church is so arranged that one presides over the whole." unquote.
So, this argument likewise draws from the principles of political philosophy 101, as I call it. Rule by one, quote unquote, does not mean that only one person or office is making every decision. Rather, it means that one person or office can ultimately make certain decisions for all. St. Thomas does not mean that the many quote unquote cannot be involved in the power of the state, for example, in any way. In fact, he states in various places that a mixed form of government including monarchical, aristocratical, and democratic elements, the rule of one, the rule of few, and the rule of many, is the best. It's actually one of the things I'll be talking about in an upcoming book with Scott Han about the American founding that this is one of the one of the wonderful features of the American Constitution. There's some not so wonderful features, but this is one of the good features because it it has a mixed regime where you have monarchical elements, you have aristocratical elements and democratic elements. So St. Thomas fully advocated this. So but at the end of the day even in this form of government a mixed regime there must be one who is in some sense the leader who can make the final call on certain issues for all. For example we can see this in the American form of government where despite the fact that our constitution establishes a mixed regime the president of the United States is ultimately both the head of state and government. The founders established this elective monarchy quote unquote with authority to execute laws independent of individual states for precisely the reasons laid out by St. Thomas. If there is ultimately no singular authority who can execute the laws, then the peace and unity of society is threatened. The church is not an exception to this rule.
So we see something similar with God's establishment of the Israelite polity. In Exodus 18, Moses is constantly occupied with acting as judge of the people's disputes. His father-in-law, Jethro, gives him a suggestion in the midst of this problem. So, this is from Exodus 18 17-23. Quote, "Moses' father-in-law said to him, 'What you are doing is not good. You and the people with you will wear yourselves out, for the thing is too heavy for you. You are not able to perform it alone. Listen now to my voice. I will give you counsel and God be with you. You shall represent the people before God and bring their cases to God. And you shall teach them the statutes and the decisions and make them know the way in which they must walk and what they must do. Moreover, choose able men from all the people, such as fear God, men who are trustworthy and who hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as rulers of thousands, of hundreds, of 50s, and of tens.' So, you know, a gradation of leaders based on the size of the people. So, continuing with verse 20 uh verse 22, 'and let them judge the people at all times. every great matter they shall bring to you, but any small matter they shall decide themselves. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you. If you do this, and God so commands you, then you will be able to endure, and all this people also will go to their place in peace.'"
Notice that Jethro's advice does not change Moses's ultimate status as God's appointed leader of all the people. In this sense, there is still quote rule by one unquote. Rather, Jethro suggesting an arrangement whereby conflicts and disputes are mostly managed at the local level, while more difficult issues ultimately converge toward the seed of Moses. Moses accepts Jethro's advice and acts accordingly. This is from Exodus 18:24-27. Quote, "So Moses gave heed to the voice of his father-in-law and did all that he had said. Moses chose able men out of all Israel and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, of hundreds, of 50s, and of tens, and they judged the people at all times. Hard cases they brought to Moses, but any small matter they decided themselves. Then Moses let his father-in-law depart, and he went his way to his own country." unquote. So again, notice that this arrangement does not ultimately change the fact that Moses has chief authority over the people for the sake of peace and unity as St. Thomas says. Many more people are now involved in judging disputes. But at the end of the day, that does not change Moses's status as chief judge overall. Rather, he is simply delegating his authority to lower levels for easier cases while both maintaining his unique status before God and retaining his authority to judge the most difficult cases. This would be an example of rule by one quote unquote that as St. Thomas makes clear elsewhere can credentially include rule by the few and the many alongside it. That's the case in a mixed regime for example. So this same reality is seen throughout the history of the Catholic Church where most affairs are managed locally and papal intervention while possible nonetheless remains fairly uncommon and is rarely step one in the resolution of a difficulty. That's the case to this very day. However, papal authority or rule by one as St. Thomas says exists in those cases where decisions for all are required for the sake of peace and unity. In fact, St. Pope Leo the Great described something very similar to this in the 400s when he wrote in letter 14, this is from section 10, talking about local bishops and their relationship with the papacy. Quote, "Local bishops whose appointment is in the greater cities should undertake a fuller responsibility through whom the care of the universal church should converge toward Peter's one seat, referring to Rome, and nothing anywhere should be separated from its head, namely the pope. Let not him then who knows he has been set over certain others referring to local bishops take it ill that someone i.e. the pope has been set over him but let him himself render the obedience which he demands of them." unquote. So you can see that for St. Leo the Great he doesn't see any conflict with this. There's one head overall but that doesn't render the local authority of bishops uh nougatory to use a great 18th century word.
So moving on to argument number four. The church on earth imitates the church in heaven which has one head. So St. Thomas's fourth argument perhaps his most unique. I'm excited to get into this one is as follows. Quote, "Moreover the church militant meaning the church on earth originates from the church triumphant meaning the church in heaven by its likeness to it. Hence in the apocalypse John saw quote Jerusalem coming down out of heaven unquote." That's a quote from apocalypse 21:2. "And Moses was bidden to make all things quote after the pattern for them which is being shown you on the mountain." That's quoting Exodus 25:40. Continuing with St. Thomas. "Now there is one who presides over the church triumphant namely God who also presides over the whole universe. For it is said they shall be his people and God himself will be with them and be their God." Quoting Apocalypse 21:3. "Therefore in the church militant there is one who presides over all. Hence it is said, quote, 'The people of Judah and the people of Israel shall be gathered together, and they shall appoint for themselves one head.'" That's quoting Hosea 1:11. "'And our Lord said, quote, there shall be one flock, one shepherd,'" quoting John 10:16. And that's the end of the quote from St. Thomas.
So, I've personally never heard this particular argument made by anyone other than St. Thomas, but it is in fact full of explanatory power. Catholics often point out how the mass is a participation on earth in the worship of heaven above. St. Thomas's argument applies a similar logic to the papacy. The church militant on earth, St. Thomas says, is patterned after the church triumphant in heaven. This truth is alluded to in multiple places in scripture where the tabernacle or temple is said to be built according to a heavenly quote pattern. You can see this in Exodus 25:9 and 40 and also a place like Hebrews 8:5. So thus the heavenly temple is the original quote unquote of the copy quote unquote on earth. If this was true of the old covenant, how much more the new covenant prior to Christ, the new high priest had not yet entered into this original quote unquote heavenly temple. But that's precisely what Christ did at his ascension, ascending into heaven, fully God and fully man to sit at the right hand of God the Father as priest, prophet, and King. Once this was done, the Holy Spirit descended on the church below at Pentecost and through the power of regeneration created new members of Christ. Hence, the church on earth ultimately originating from the church in heaven. As Christ told us quite explicitly, the third and final temple is his body which he equates with the church whose members are both in heaven and on earth. Sidest stepping for the moment the church suffering in purgatory. That'll be for other podcast episodes. Hence St. Thomas's argument that the church militant is a quote copy of the heavenly quote original the church triumphant. So of course there are also differences between the two. The church militant is still enduring many trials that the church triumphant has conquered. The church militant still struggles against sin while the church triumphant does not. At the end of history, both are perfectly united in a new heaven and new earth. However, in the meantime, they are still bound together as members of the same body of Christ, members of the same church, whose perpetuity, victory, and authority have all been promised and guaranteed by Christ. But since as St. Thomas says the church militant originates from the church triumphant meaning ultimately the nation of priests the church originates from the high priest Christ who is now in heaven and the third and final temple on earth originates from and is part of the same and the same third and final temple in heaven. The pope does not preside over the church militant in a way that is independent of Christ. Rather, he does so in a way that points to Christ and the church triumphant. As the church triumphant has one head, so too does the church militant, whose head is not separate from, but indeed originates from and is under the head of all who is Christ. This correspondence between church triumphant and church militant is also the basis for the church militant's infallibility and Christ promised that whatever is bound and loosed on earth by the keys given to St. Peter and through him to the rest of the apostles and their successors shall likewise be bound and loosed in heaven. You can see this in Matthew 16:19 and also Matthew 18:18. You can also see a uh see becoming Catholic number 34, an article that we wrote where we show that the Jewish understanding of the term binding and loosing used by Christ matches the Catholic assertion about the authority of the church. It's the way that authority is linked between church militant and church triumphant which is why St. Thomas says that as the church rampant has one head so the church militant has an earthly head who's under that one head and the correspondence between the two.
We now proceed to the first objection addressed by St. Thomas. That's objection number one. Christ is the chief shepherd. Meaning if Christ is the chief shepherd Peter clearly cannot be the chief shepherd. So St. Thomas responds to this first objection as follows. Quote, "Someone, however, may say that the one head and the one shepherd is Christ, who is the one bridegroom of the one church, but this reply is not sufficient. It is evident that Christ himself accomplishes all the church's sacraments. It is he who baptizes. It is he who forgives sins. He is the true priest who offered himself on the altar of the cross, and by whose power his own body is consecrated daily on the altar." And yet because he was not to remain bodily present to all the faithful, he chose ministers that through them he might give that same body to the faithful as we have shown above. For the very reason then that he was about to withdraw his bodily presence from the church, he needed to appoint one to take his place in governing the whole church. Therefore, before his ascension, he said to Peter, quote, 'Feed my sheep.'" That's John 21:17. "and before his passion, quote, 'When you have converted again, confirm your brothers.'" Quoting Luke 22:32, "And to him alone he made the promise, quote, 'I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,'" unquote. That's Matthew 16:19. "In order to show that the power of the keys was to be received from him by others so as to safeguard the unity of the church," unquote.
So St. Thomas refutes this objection by relying on verses in scripture that are often cited in defense of the papacy. In addition to these, others could be cited in which Christ speaks more generally to all the apostles in extraordinarily strong terms about the authority he is giving them. In both Matthew 19:28 and Luke 22:es 28-30, Christ tells the apostles that they will rule Israel from thrones. This reality seems to be spoken of in the book of apocalypse as well. C 20:es 4-6 in which quote those to whom judgment was committed sit on thrones after the binding of the dragon presumably referring to the binding of Satan by Christ's death and resurrection. In the Gospel of Luke, Christ says to the apostles, quote, "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me." That was Luke 10:16. Likewise, in the great commission, Christ gives the apostles the authority to baptize and teach the nations to observe everything he has commanded. You can see that in Matthew 28 18-20. Christ even goes so far as to say that the glory given to him by the father he has given to the apostles. This is quoting from John 17:22. Quote, "The glory which thou has given me, I have given to them that they may be one even as we are one." unquote. This verse is particularly powerful because Christ is not speaking about his divinity. For the son is equally divine as the father. Nor is he bestowing divinity on the apostles. He is instead speaking of the glory bestowed on his humanity which he then says he bestowed on the apostles and thus on their humanity as well since they lack a divine nature. This extraordinary assertion undergirds not only the papacy but the church as a whole which is Christ's body and thus benefits from the same glory he received from the father and now bestows on his church as his body. These and other verses prove St. Thomas's assertion that despite the fact that Christ is ultimately the shepherd of the church, this does not mean that there are not true shepherds who rightly govern with divine permission under him. Chief among these subordinate shepherds is St. Peter himself, which brings us to the second objection addressed by St. Thomas.
Objection number two, Peter does not have successors. Heard this many, many times from Protestants. St. Thomas responds to the second objection as follows. Quote, "It cannot be said that although he conferred this dignity on Peter, it does not pass from him to others. For it is evident that Christ so instituted his church that it would endure to the end of the world." Quote, "Of the increase of his government and peace, there will be no end upon the throne of David and over his kingdom to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forever more." That's Isaiah 9:6. Continuing with St. Thomas, "Hence it is evident that those he appointed to the ministry then and there were to communicate their powers to their successors until the end of time for the good of the church. Especially since he says quote behold I am with you to the close of the age unquote that's quoting Matthew 28:20 continuing with St. Thomas "this suffices to refute the presumptuous error of those who dare to withdraw from obedience and submission to Peter by refusing to acknowledge his successor the Roman pontiff as the shepherd of the universal church."qu
So St. Thomas responds to the second objection by affirming the reality of apostolic succession. We have a great quote archive on the becoming Catholic resources on our website eternalchrist.com that has tons of quotes from the church fathers on this topic. So we suggest you check it out. St. Thomas also points to Christ's promise that quote I am with you always to the close of the age unquote addressed to the apostles at the great commissioning. But since the apostles died in the first century and the close of the age quote unquote has not yet come, this promise must necessarily apply not only to the apostles but to their successors. Likewise, if Christ established St. Peter as the head of the church, and if apostolic succession is true, then it is only logical that the superior authority of St. Peter among all the other apostles would likewise be passed down through his successors. If the church at its smallest and least diverse had a divinely instituted head, there is no reason to think St. Peter's successors would not continue in the same position as the church grows in number and diversity across the nations of the world.
So in conclusion, let's summarize St. Thomas's brief argument in favor of the papacy, which consists of the following points, four arguments and two objections. Argument number one is Christians require a universal head, the pope, for the same reason they have local heads, bishops. Argument number two, there is a need for an authority who can resolve disputes about the faith for all. Argument number three is that peace and unity are better secured by the rule of one than by many. Argument number four is that the church militant is a type and copy of the church triumphant from which it originates. The church triumphant has a head Christ. Therefore, so does the church militant, the pope under Christ. And then responding to the first objection that Christ is the one shepherd. This is refuted by St. Thomas by showing that Christ clearly established other shepherds with his own authority beneath him and preeminently St. Peter. He refuted the second objection that St. Peter does not have successors by showing that the Old Testament prophecy of the eternal messianic kingdom and Christ's promise that the church would endure to the end of the age necessarily means that the apostles who govern the church including St. Peter had successors after their deaths and that that succession continues from the first century all the way until Christ's return. And this was something that my eyes were very very much open to from the church fathers as a whole who opened all these amazing Old Testament prophecies and showed how they applied to the Catholic Church. We're going to be talking about so many of these things and it's it's very very exciting. So stay tuned for future episodes on those topics. And with that we will close with our normal anthem verse Psalm 73 25- 26. Who have I in heaven but you and on earth I desire nothing besides you. My flesh and my heart may fail, but the Lord is the strength of my heart and my portion forever. [Music]