Mass for the Election of the Roman Pontiff

 

Pope

• Conclave
• mass
• cardinals
• prayer
• Holy Spirit

Cardinal Re: United in prayer before the Conclave, we ask the Holy Spirit for guidance

Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, Dean of the College of Cardinals, presides over the Mass for the Election of the Roman Pontiff, and calls for unity in faith and prayer as the Cardinals go into the Conclave to elect the new Pope. "May the Pope elected may be he whom the Church and humanity need at this difficult, complex, and troubled turning point in history."

By Thaddeus Jones

On Wednesday morning, 7 May, in Saint Peter's Basilica the Mass for the Election of the Roman Pontiff took place with the Cardinals and over five thousand faithful in attendance. Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, Dean of the College of Cardinals, presided over the celebration, saying that in a special way "we feel united with the entire People of God in their sense of faith, love for the Pope and confident expectation." 

Recalling the reading in the Acts of the Apostles how after Christ’s ascension into heaven all were united and persevering in prayer together with Mary, the Mother of Jesus, the Cardinal said in his homily that all gathered here are praying together as well just a few hours before the start of the Conclave, "under the gaze of Our Lady beside the altar, in this Basilica which rises above the tomb of the Apostle Peter."

United in faith and prayer

Cardinal Re explained that at this celebration we invoke the help of the Holy Spirit, asking for "his light and strength so that the Pope elected may be he whom the Church and humanity need at this difficult, complex, and troubled turning point in history."

“To pray, by invoking the Holy Spirit, is the only right and proper attitude to take as the Cardinal electors prepare to undertake an act of the highest human and ecclesial responsibility and to make a choice of exceptional importance. This is a human act for which every personal consideration must be set aside, keeping in mind and heart only the God of Jesus Christ and the good of the Church and of humanity.”

Love that knows no limits

As proclaimed in the Gospel reading during the celebration, Cardinal Re recalled how Jesus calls on everyone to love one another as He has loved them, even to the point of laying down one's life, a message of boundless love that the Lord calls a "new" commandment.

“The love that Jesus reveals knows no limits and must characterise the thoughts and actions of all his disciples, who must always show authentic love in their behaviour and commit themselves to building a new civilisation, what Paul VI called the “civilisation of love.” Love is the only force capable of changing the world.”

Call to fraternal love and communion

Continuing in his homily, Cardinal Re recalled how the readings proclaimed during the celebration call us to fraternal love, mutual help, ecclesial communion and universal human fraternity. And a key task of every successor of Peter is fostering communion in all forms: "communion of all Christians with Christ; communion of the Bishops with the Pope; communion of the Bishops among themselves...entirely directed towards communion among persons, peoples and cultures." 

Unity in diversity

The readings also remind us about the duty "to maintain the unity of the Church on the path traced out by Christ to the Apostles." This unity of the Church "is willed by Christ," he explained, a unity that is strong and marked by "profound communion in diversity, provided that full fidelity to the Gospel is maintained."

“Each Pope continues to embody Peter and his mission and thus represents Christ on earth; he is the rock on which the Church is built (cf. Mt 16:18). The election of a new Pope is not a simple succession of persons. The election of a new Pope is always the Apostle Peter who returns.”

United in prayer

As the Cardinal electors cast their votes in the Sistine Chapel, Cardinal Re urged everyone to pray that the Holy Spirit, "who in the last hundred years has given us a series of truly holy and great Pontiffs, will give us a new Pope according to God’s heart for the good of the Church and of humanity."

“May we pray for "a Pope who knows how best to awaken the consciences of all and awaken the moral and spiritual energies in today’s society" that "tends to forget God."”

The Cardinal remarked how the world expects much from the Church in safeguarding the "fundamental human and spiritual values" that human coexistence and future generations depend upon.

“May the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church, intercede with her maternal intercession, so that the Holy Spirit will enlighten the minds of the Cardinal electors and help them agree on the Pope that our time needs.”

Pope Francis recalls the conclave of 2005 and hs support of Cardinal Ratzinger for Pope

 

Pope says he was 'used' in 2005 conclave: Ratzinger 'was my candidate'

Pope Francis discusses details from the 2005 conclave he participated in as archbishop of Buenos Aires in an upcoming book

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Pope Francis voted for Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict XVI, in the 2005 conclave that followed the death of St. John Paul II.

"He was the only one who could be pope at that time," Pope Francis said about his immediate predecessor in an excerpt from the upcoming book "El Sucesor" ("The Successor"). The excerpt was published March 31 by the Spanish daily newspaper ABC.

Pope Francis told Spanish journalist Javier Martínez-Brocal that he voted for Cardinal Ratzinger in the 2005 conclave because after the "dynamic, very active pontificate" of St. John Paul, "a pope was needed that would maintain a healthy balance, a transitional pope.

"El Sucesor" is a book-length interview with Martínez-Brocal focused on Pope Francis' relationship with Pope Benedict. Discussing the conclave that he participated in as Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires and which elected his predecessor, Pope Francis said he was "used" by other cardinals attempting to block Cardinal Ratzinger's election to the papacy. He was widely reported to have come out second on the final ballot.

Pope Francis said that a group of cardinals deployed a "full-fledged maneuver" by putting forward his name "to block Ratzinger's election and then negotiate for a different, third candidate." He said he had received 40 of the 115 votes from among the cardinal-electors in the Sistine Chapel -- "enough to stop the candidacy of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, because if they would have kept voting for me he would not have been able to reach the two-thirds needed to be elected pope."

"They still did not agree on who, but they were on the verge of throwing out a name," he said.

Once he learned of the strategy after the second or third ballot cast in the April 18-19 conclave, Pope Francis said he told Colombian Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos to not "joke with my candidacy" and that he would not accept being pope if he were elected. "And from there Benedict was elected," he said.

Pope Francis said the group of cardinals who had put him up for election later told him they did not want a "foreign" pope. Although he did not explain what the comment meant, the term "foreign" was used in media reports after the 1978 election of St. John Paul II, the first non-Italian pope since 1523. Although Pope Francis was born and raised in Argentina he is ethnically Italian.

Pope Francis said that Cardinal Ratzinger "was my candidate" in the conclave and that he came out of the conclave feeling pleased.

"If they had elected someone like me, who makes a big mess, he would not have been able to do anything," he said. "Benedict XVI was a man who went with the new style, and it wasn't easy for him. He found a lot of resistance inside the Vatican."

Asked what he thought the Holy Spirit was saying to the Catholic Church through the election of Pope Benedict, the pope said the Spirit was saying, "Here I am in charge. There is no room for maneuvering."

In the book excerpt, Pope Francis prefaces his response to the journalist's questions about the 2005 election by explaining that while cardinals are sworn not to reveal what happens in a conclave, "popes are allowed to tell."

The book is scheduled to be released in Spanish April 3; no publication date for an English-language translation for the book has yet been announced.

The new normal?? Rules for Pope's emerti/emeritus

 

The pope emeritus puzzle: Will Pope Francis rewrite the rules of resignation?

By Andrea Gagliarducci

Rome Newsroom, Jul 20, 2022 / 03:55 am

With speculation running rife whether Pope Francis could resign, and whether he might retire to a residence in the Vatican Gardens like Benedict XVI, it is worth analyzing what the pope has actually said — and how this aligns with his wider project of a reform for the Roman Curia and the Catholic Church.

Speaking with the Mexican television company Televisa, Pope Francis has made it known, once again, that he does not intend to give up the Petrine ministry. If and when he does though, he would not take the title of Pope Emeritus.

Instead, Francis would become Bishop Emeritus of Rome. He would hear confessions and dedicate himself to the poor.

Where Benedict and Francis think differently

His recent comments suggest Pope Francis might go to live in the Lateran Palace, which is the seat of the pope as Bishop of Rome.

In this interview, Pope Francis also discussed — in clear terms — how he thinks the office of Pope Emeritus should be defined and how he would interpret his own role after a possible renunciation.

Pope Francis’ conception of the office differs from that of his predecessor: Benedict XVI decided to take the title of Pope Emeritus, to continue wearing white, although without la pellegrina, which is the white mantle symbolizing episcopal authority.

Benedict XVI defined the terms of his resignation in his last general audience as Pope on February 27, 2013: "There can no longer be a return to the private sphere. My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this. I do not return to private life, to a life of travel, meetings, receptions, conferences, and so on. I am not abandoning the cross, but remaining in a new way at the side of the crucified Lord. "

Does one stay pope forever?

In practice, Benedict XVI distinguished between the munus and the officium, that is, between the function and the exercise of the function. Once elected pope, he remains pope forever.

In a certain sense, Benedict XVI equated the election as pope with a further episcopal ordination. The theologian Karl Rahner, who emphasized that the power of order and the power of jurisdiction were indissociable, had come to consider the primacy conferred with the election as Pope as the highest degree of the sacrament of orders. According to this criterion, the beginning of the Pope's Petrine ministry would represent a unique ordination.

Pope Francis, however, plans to be Bishop of Rome Emeritus. He would no longer have the Petrine primacy and therefore would return to work in public life as a confessor, and likely also reside in the Lateran Palace.

This role was outlined by Father Gianfranco Ghirlanda, canonist and cardinal to be elected at the next consistory, in an essay from 2013 republished by Civiltà Cattolica.

Seeking a reform that works

Ghirlanda’s essay offers many observations on the role of a pope emeritus, starting with the fact that ordination and authority are distinct from one another. The issue is a fundamental one, and came up during the reform of the Roman Curia when lay people were allowed to take up positions in the Curia departments.

If that is the standard, episcopal ordination is no longer a prerequisite for authority, much less collegiality with the Pope, who is also a bishop.

In his statements, Pope Francis seems to be intending not to separate munus and officium. One ceases with the cessation of the other, and whoever renounces them returns to their previous life.

Will this be the reform that is announced for the office of Pope Emeritus? It is possible, certainly. The extent to which a Bishop of Rome Emeritus can influence the life of the Church will also require definition. By the admission of Pope Francis himself, everything in recent years has worked for the extraordinary character of Benedict XVI. But would it work the same with another pope emeritus?

A look at some potential future Pope's; just because

Turkson a credible successor to Francis, but not the only one

• In Analysis, Vatican
• John L. Allen Jr.
  September 2, 2016
  EDITOR

Ghanaian Cardinal Peter Turkson will head the new Vatican office to promote integral human development. (Credit: CNS/Tom Tracy.)

For those who will be looking to support continuity with Pope Francis in the next papal election, African cardinal Peter Turkson is certainly at the top of many lists, but there are other plausible candidates, including one who may surprise you.

Not that there was any real mystery about it, but Wednesday certainly confirmed that Cardinal Peter Turkson of Ghana is very much part of Pope Francis’ inner circle, one of those senior churchmen upon whom he most relies to carry out his agenda.
On Wednesday, Pope Francis created a new Vatican department for human development, combining several previous agencies including one for justice and peace headed by Turkson, who at just 67 remains one of the younger figures at the senior levels of Francis’ papacy.
Francis legendarily is his own man, far less dependent upon aides or advisers to craft his important decisions than most leaders who head important global institutions. Even so, looking around, there are a handful of key figures who clearly enjoy this pope’s favor and represent architects of important parts of his agenda.
Beyond Turkson, some of those figures include:

• Italian Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican’s Secretariat of State.
• Honduran Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, coordinator of the pope’s council of nine cardinal advisers.
• Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Munich, Germany, a key Francis ally in his two synods of bishops on the family and head of the pope’s new Council for the Economy.
• Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle of Manila in the Philippines, president of the global Catholic charitable group Caritas.
• Archbishop Bruno Forte of Chieti-Vasto, an important theological resource for Francis.
• Bishop Nunzio Galantino, secretary of the powerful Italian bishops’ conference.
• Archbishop Konrad Krajewski, who runs the pope’s personal charitable outreach in Rome.
• Archbishop Víctor Manuel Fernández, appointed by Francis as rector of Argentina’s Catholic University, and largely perceived as one of the pope’s ghostwriters.
• Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley of Boston, head of pope’s commission for the protection of minors and a figure whose whose own personality and style clearly are in sync with the Francis vision of ecclesiastical leadership.

For Vatican-watchers, one unavoidable question implied by such a list of papal favorites comes down to this: Is there a possible successor among them?
Right now, there is absolutely zero indication of any health crisis around Pope Francis, any flagging energy, or any imminent end to his reign. However, merely as a thought exercise, Roman dinner tables sometimes find themselves occupied by curiosity over who might be best positioned to carry forward the Pope Francis project when Francis himself is either unable, or unwilling, to continue.
The central voting issue in the next conclave, which is the event when a pope is elected, will almost certainly break down along the lines of continuity or discontinuity with Pope Francis - in part because conclaves to some extent always function as a referendum on the papacy that’s just ended, and in part because Francis has set a bold course for the Church that has excited many in Catholicism and alarmed others who may feel it represents too much of a break.
What we might call the “discontinuity” party will certainly have its candidates, among whom someone such as Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea, currently the Vatican’s top official for liturgy and a staunch conservative on matters of doctrine, may well figure prominently.
The question is who the candidate of the continuity party may be, and there’s a good chance that at least in the early rounds, one of the figures listed above and associated with the Francis approach will seem the obvious choice.
Certainly, there’s a solid argument to be made for Turkson. He’s a polyglot, speaking multiple languages fluently, he’s charismatic and projects well on TV, and obviously there would a definite buzz around the idea of a “black pope.”
Moreover, he’s got deep credentials both as a local bishop and now as a Vatican official, and would be taken seriously as the kind of leader whose experience would position him to lead.
In all honesty, however, the pro-continuity camp might feel even more comfortable with Parolin, 61, who as an Italian and a veteran of the inner workings of the Secretariat of State just oozes a capacity to govern, yet whose kismet with Francis does not make him a stereotypical product of “the system” or the old guard.
The knock against Parolin, of course, is that electing an Italian might strike some of the electors most sympathetic to Francis as a step back, a return to an Italian-dominated Church not sufficiently aware of, or open to, the rest of the world.
In unpacking the possibilities, it’s important to remember that one defining feature of the continuity camp is a sense that Francis represents a healthy break with the ways of the past, moving beyond a stifling version of tradition that sometimes, these folks believe, left the Church hobbled in its ability to adapt.
They might be willing to think past the usual protocol that says to be a serious papal candidate one must already be a cardinal, and if that’s the case, here’s a plausible wild card candidate to be the one to pick up the Pope Francis mantle: Krajewski.
On the surface, it seems a silly idea. Aside from not being a cardinal, he’s also just 52, and conventional wisdom would say that’s far too young to be elected a pope - the last two were 78 and 76, respectively, at the time of election. His position also carries no real policy responsibility, so he might not posses quite the gravitas one typically looks for in a pope.
On the other hand, the possibility of resignation changes the calculus a bit, meaning you’re not necessarily saddled with a pope for life, and Krajewski has a great deal going for him. As a Pope Francis man, he’s obviously identified with the agenda of this papacy, but as a Pole he also represents a more traditional form of Catholic life that might be reassuring to some conservatives, and he also embodies the St. John Paul II legacy.
After the last week, in other words, two things now seem inarguably true. One is that Turkson is an important runner to represent the future of the Pope Francis project the next time the Church finds itself needing to pick a pope, and the other is that he’s not quite the only figure advocates of continuity with this pope could see plausibly stepping into that role.

Homily and celebration for today's Feast of the Chair of Peter

Pope’s Homily for Jubilee of the Curia, Feast of Chair of St. Peter

“It is not the rock that gets its name from Peter, but Peter that gets it from the rock, just as the name Christ does not derive from the Christian, but the name Christian derives from Christ”

February 22, 2016ZENIT

WIKIMEDIA COMMONS - Alberto Luccaroni

Below is a ZENIT translation of Pope Francis’ homily during the Mass he celebrated this morning in St. Peter’s Basilica for the Feast of the Chair of Peter and the Jubilee of Mercy for the Roman Curia and all the Institutions related to the Holy See:
***
The liturgical feast of the Chair of Saint Peter sees us gathered to celebrate the Jubilee of Mercy as a community of service of the Roman Curia, of the Governorate and of the Institutions connected to the Holy See. We have crossed the Holy Door and reached the tomb of the Apostle Peter to make our profession of faith, and today the Word of God illumines our gestures in a special way.
At this moment, the Lord Jesus repeats to each one of us His question: “Who do you say that I am?” (Matthew 16:15). It is a clear and direct question, in face of which it is not possible to flee or remain neutral, or to send the answer or delegate it to someone else. However, there is nothing inquisitorial in it, rather, it is full of love! — love of our only Teacher, who today calls us to renew our faith in Him, recognizing him as Son of God and Lord of our life. And the first called to renew his profession of faith is the Successor of Peter, who bears in himself the responsibility to confirm his brothers (Cf. Luke 22:32).
Let us allow grace to mould our heart again to believe, and to open our mouth to carry out our profession of faith and to obtain salvation (Cf. Romans 10:10). Hence, let us make Peter’s words our own: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16). May our thought and our gaze be fixed on Jesus Christ, beginning and end of every action of the Church. He is the foundation and no one can place a different one (1 Corinthians 3:11). He is the “rock” on which we must build. Saint Augustine reminds of this when he writes that the Church, although agitated and shaken by the events of history, “does not collapse because she is founded on the rock, from which Peter derives his name. It is not the rock that gets its name from Peter, but Peter that gets it from the rock, just as the name Christ does not derive from the Christian, but the name Christian derives from Christ. […] Christ is the rock, on whose foundation Peter was also built” (In Joh 124, 5:PL 35, 1972).
From this profession of faith the task derives for each one of us to correspond to God’s call. Requested of Pastors, first of all, is to have God Himself as model, who takes care of His flock. The prophet Ezekiel described the way God acts: He goes in search of the lost sheep, and brings the lost back to the sheepfold, bandages the wounded and cares for the sick (34:16) – behavior that is a sign of love that knows no bounds. It is faithful, constant, unconditional dedication, so that His mercy can reach all the weakest. And, yet, we must not forget that Ezekiel’s prophecy starts from the verification of the failings of the Pastors of Israel. Therefore, it also does us good — called to be Pastors in the Church — to let the face of God the Good Shepherd illumine us, to purify us, to transforms us and to restore us fully renewed to our mission., so that also in our work environments we can feel, cultivate and practice a strong pastoral sense, first of all with the persons we meet every day. May no one feel neglected or mistreated, but may everyone be able to experience, first of all here, the solicitous care of the Good Shepherd.
We are called to be collaborators of God in such a fundamental and unique enterprise as that of witnessing with our existence the strength of the grace that transforms and the power of the Spirit that renews. Let us allow the Lord to free us from every temptation that takes us away from what is essential in our mission and let us rediscover the beauty of professing our faith in the Lord Jesus. Fidelity to the ministry combines well with the mercy we wish to experience. In Sacred Scripture, moreover, fidelity and mercy are an inseparable binomial. Where one is, the other is also found, and precisely in their reciprocity and complementarity the presence itself of the Good Shepherd can be seen. The fidelity requested of us is to act according to the heart of Christ. As we heard from the words of the Apostle Peter, we must tend the flock with a “generous spirit” and become a “model” for all. Thus, “when the chief Shepherd is manifested,” we will be able to receive “the unfading crown of glory” (1 Peter 5:14).
[Original text: Italian] [Translation by ZENIT] The Jubilee of the Roman Curia, of the Governorate and of the Institutions connected to the Holy See began at 8:30 am in Paul VI Hall with the Celebration of the Half Hour and a meditation from Father Marko Ivan Rupnik, S.J. on “Mercy in Our Daily Life.” The Holy Father Francis was present and, immediately after, took part with the laity and Religious in the procession that — passing by Saint Peter’s Square — reached the Vatican Basilica through the Holy Door.

Even though this article was written in 2008, it cleary explains why we have a Pope. My summary: because Jesus said so and it's in the Bible!

Why Do Catholics Have a Pope?

• Sarah PhillipsCrosswalk.com Contributing Writer
• 2008

                                          

                

Editor's note: This piece first ran in 2008 when Pope Benedict XVI visited the U.S. We're re-running it in light of Pope Francis's 2015 visit.
Pope: From the Greek word papas, a term of endearment meaning "papa" or "daddy."
With the recent, historic visit of Pope Benedict XVI to the U.S., many Christians may be wondering what exactly Catholics believe about the robed figure with the German accent and his line of predecessors. Why do Catholics have a Pope? Do Catholics worship him? Is his authority political, spiritual, or is he just a figurehead?
While I had a basic understanding of the Catholic papacy before his visit, I didn't fully grasp it. So, in an effort to better understand this central figure in Christendom and to help Christians more effectively dialogue, I dove into some heady reading materials from both Catholic and non-Catholic sources. Hopefully, my explanation here will offer some clarity on what Catholics really believe.
First, a summary: For Catholics, the Pope is more than a ceremonial leader. The Pope is considered the spiritual successor to the Apostle Peter. As successor to the "Chair of Peter," he is the Supreme Pastor of the Catholic Church, God's steward ordained to authoritatively teach, unify, and protect God's people, keeping them free from error and deception (CCC 882, 890).

Of his many official titles, the Pope is the Bishop of Rome and the head of the Magisterium (the teaching authority of the Church made up of the college of Bishops). He holds the final word on matters of faith and morals (known as "papal infallibility"). In the words of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (937): The Pope enjoys, by divine institution, 'supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls' (CD 2)."
There's a lot of strong wording here, but before we dive into some of the details, it's important to clarify that Catholics, in fact, do not worship the Pope or see him as a replacement of Christ or the Heavenly Father. From the Catholic perspective, the office of the papacy affirms Christ's Kingship and the Church's confidence in the Holy Spirit to guide believers. So, to fully understand the relationship Catholics have with the man they call both "Papa" and "Supreme Pontiff," let's look at a source all Christians have in common: Scripture.
Matthew 16: 13-19
While Catholic doctrine pulls from many Scriptures when defining Church authority, Matthew 16:13-19 is one of the most important. Indeed, Catholic teachings point to Matthew 16: 18 as the moment when Christ officially instituted Peter as the first Pope, so it's worth spending the bulk of our time here.
The scene opens with Jesus and the Twelve in the region of Caesarea Philippi – an area where ancient pagan worship of the Greek god Pan, the god of Spring and shepherds, once flourished (Ray 1999, 32-33). It was a dramatic place located on the side of a mountain with a sheer rock wall overshadowing the town with Pan's namesake, Paneas. Adding to the already stunning landscape, a temple to the Roman Caesar Augustus stood at the wall's highest point. The scene is ripe with symbolism for Catholics. Catholic apologist Stephen Ray points out, "By choosing this location for the appointment, Jesus clearly shows that he is setting up his divine kingdom in opposition to the worldly kingdom of the Roman Caesars, who claimed divinity for themselves" (1999, 32).
When Jesus came to the region of Ceasarea Philippi, he asked his disciples "Who do people say the Son of Man is?"
They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
"But what about you?' he asked. "Who do you say I am?'
Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."
The Catholic Church sees three important points here:

1. The Primacy of Simon Bar-Jonah above the other apostles demonstrated through his divinely-inspired response to Jesus.
2. The establishment of Simon Bar-Jonah, renamed "Peter," as the Rock from which Christ expressed intention to build His Church.
3. The handing over of the keys to the kingdom with the authority to "loose" and "bind."

Simon's divinely-inspired response. While our ears may have become numb to these passages over the centuries, this moment was, no doubt, as dramatic as the surrounding landscape – one on which Protestants and Catholics alike hinge their faith. Jesus' earthly ministry had made waves among the Jews and Gentiles. The apostles here recount how, in awe of Jesus' teaching and miracles, many surmised he must be an Old Testament prophet come back from the dead. But the truth about Jesus' identity was even more astonishing than the rumors, so amazing that even His closest followers had yet to make the connection. When Jesus turns to His chosen twelve to identify Him, Simon Bar-Jonah ("son of Jonah") speaks first among all – a pattern of leadership the Catholic Church teaches can be found throughout the New Testament (CCC 880). In this defining moment, Simon asserts Jesus is not merely a prophet but the Messiah, God Incarnate. The Apostle's astounding profession of faith – directly inspired by the Heavenly Father – leads into Christ's words that for Catholics have had tangible implications to this very day.
The renaming of Simon. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
When a person in the Bible is renamed, it is a sign of God's intention to work in a special way through that individual. Abram became the father of nations after being renamed "Abraham," and Sarai the mother after being renamed "Sarah." Other pivotal renamings in Biblical history include Jacob becoming "Israel" and Saul becoming "Paul."
In regards to Catholic doctrine, the implication of Simon's new name is easiest to understand when going back to Jesus' native language, Aramaic -- the language scholars believe the original words were spoken (Ray 1999, 34). Unlike modern English and New Testament Greek, the Aramaic word for "Peter" and the word "rock" are identical: Kepha. So this verse, when spoken, would have sounded something like this:
And I tell you that you are Rock (Kepha), and on this rock (kepha) I will build my church…
Catholic doctrine asserts that linguistically, Christ links the person and position of Peter – not Himself or a general profession of faith – to the founding of His Church here (CCC 881). While both Christ and the Apostles are referred to as "rocks" (kepha) and "small stones" (Greek, petros) in other areas of Scripture, Catholic teaching points to Peter as the only person in the Bible given the proper name "Kepha," later spelled "Cephas"(Ray 1999, 35).
While some Christians might see the assertion that Peter was the rock upon which Christ would build His Church as an affront to Christ's Headship and status as the true Rock, Catholics take a different view. To better understand why, let's move to the next Scripture, involving the keys to the kingdom.
The keys to the kingdom
I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
If you've ever seen the official Papal seal, you'll notice a set of golden keys included in it. Catholic teaching puts this verse in context with Isaiah 22:22, where God tells Isaiah to go to King Hezekiah's steward, Shebna, and inform him of God's intention to replace him with Eliakim. In regards to the new steward, Eliakim, God says: I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.
In Old Testament times, the steward of the palace was the king's right-hand man, the second-in-command. When the king was away, the royal steward was keeper of the keys to the kingdom, ruling in the king's stead. While he looked after the affairs of the kingdom as the king instructed, he never replaced the king but awaited his return. When the present steward died (or in this case, when the Almighty intervened), the office was filled by another.
The office of the Papacy works in the same manner. Catholics believe Christ, to ensure the unity and health of His flock, gave Peter governing authority over His Church by handing over the keys to His Kingdom. Like the ancient "key keepers," Catholics do not believe the Pope is the new king but instead a steward awaiting the King's return. Even the Pope's title "Father" imitates the role and title of the steward of Judah, also called "father." Until Christ's second coming, the keys will be passed on to each successor to the Papal office (Ray 1999, 29-40; CCC 857-860).
Now, what do the terms "binding" and "loosing" refer to? These words sounded strange to my modern ears, so I looked for some historical context. Apparently, the terms were common in Rabbinic canon-law, representing the legislative and judicial powers held by a Rabbi (Ray 1999, 40). In this context, Catholics view Peter's key-keeping status as one that makes him "Supreme Pastor," with final authority over what is permitted and what is denied in matters of doctrine and spiritual discipline.

How does Papal Infallibility work?

The issue of religious authority brings up an often misunderstood doctrine of Catholic teaching: Papal infallibility. We see that Catholics believe the Pope has great authority in matters of the faith, but this doesn't mean that Catholics believe every word the Pope says comes straight from the Heavenly Father like Peter's first pronouncement.
Papal infallibility refers to the belief that while all Christians have personal access to the Holy Spirit in prayer, Christ promised a unique protection over the Apostles’ teachings, ensuring they would preach without error (John 16:12-15). In order for a papal teaching to be considered free of error or "infallible," the Pope must a) be speaking on a matter of faith and morals (not on his recent vacation plans) and b) make it clear he is speaking from the "Chair of Peter" and that what he is about to say is binding. Back to the concept of guardianship, the Catholic Church teaches that infallible statements are for affirming what has always been true and is not a method of creating new beliefs (CCC 86, 888-891). Official statements of infallibility are rare today – the last one was made in 1950, long before Pope Benedict XVI.
Another important clarification: Papal Infallibility refers to doctrine being protected from error, not the man holding the Papal office being free of imperfection or sin. Catholics point to Peter's sinfulness as an example of failings in a Pope, and John Paul II was known to confess his sins weekly.
Servant of the Servants of God
One last "key" element of Catholic teaching on the Papacy is worth mentioning. As is typical with the Christian faith, a great paradox exists that endears Catholics further to their "Papa." Three times after Christ's resurrection, Jesus asked Peter if he loved Him, and in response to each of Peter's professions of love, Jesus instructed him to feed and care for His sheep (John 21: 15-17). Catholics believe that in imitation of Christ, Peter's successor is a shepherd called to embrace the biblical model of servant-leadership, earning him the official title "Servant of the Servants of God." The sacrifices made of Pontiffs are often so great, that it is not uncommon for Popes, including the current Pope, to accept their appointment out of a sense of obedience instead of personal desire. So the office, while powerful, is meant to be authoritative in nature, not authoritarian like a dictatorship.

Msgr. Charles Pope reflects on God's plan that includes a Pope

If No One is Pope, Everyone is Pope. A Reflection on the Unitive Dimension of the Pope’s Office and Charism

Msgr. Charles Pope • September 22, 2015 •

 

 

 

 

 

Today we welcome Pope Francis to the United States. In so doing, we welcome more than just a popular public figure. We welcome someone whom the Lord prays for in a very special manner. Simon Peter and his successors enjoy a special charism to unite us, by the Lord’s prayer and grace. Let’s look at the scriptural foundation of this prayer and charism and see how essential the office of the pope is for us.

One day, near the final ascent to Jerusalem, the Lord warned of a fundamental problem that the Church would face: disunity. He turned to Simon Peter and said of the Twelve,

Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you all that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers (Luke 22:31-32).

To “sift like wheat” is to divide, and Satan would work hard at it in order to divide the apostles, and the Church with them. The debate about who was the greatest only served to show what a mess we human beings, when left to our own devices, will make of something.

Yes, Jesus plainly says that the devil is going to work hard to divide you. And Jesus’ plan is not to write a book and then just hope that everyone follows it and interprets it in the same way. His plan is not to pray that they all work out their differences.

Jesus’ plan is to pray for one man, Simon Peter. Now Peter is not invisible, nor do his words require interpretation. For if anyone wants to ask, “What do you mean by this?” he can just go right up to Peter and say, “Peter, what do you mean by this?” And the real Peter can answer.

So, the Lord’s plan for unity is to have one visible man; one living, breathing source of unity. The Lord will pray for him; thus we can be assured of right outcomes in matters of faith and morals if we follow Peter (and his successors, the popes) in matters that might divide us.

Peter fulfilled this task of unity well and consistently, as recounted in the Acts of the Apostles, the history of the early Church. He rose to settle the question of Judas’ successor (Acts 1:15ff). He preached the first public sermon (Acts 2). He was inspired in a dream and then baptized the first Gentile converts (Acts 10). He arose at the Council of Jerusalem to settle the dispute between the “Party of James” and Paul, Barnabas, and others about Gentile converts (Acts 15).

Yes, Peter strengthened and unified the brethren. This does not mean that he did so without sin. On one occasion St. Paul even had to rebuke Peter (cf Gal 2). For though Peter had taught correctly (that Gentiles were in without lots of customary Jewish observances), he did not fully live the teaching, drawing back from close association with the Gentiles in order to avoid offending Jewish Christians. We do not argue that Peter and his successors are sinless, only that in solemnly teaching on faith and morals they enjoy the prayer of the Lord and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, never to teach error and thus unite us in the truth.

Peter’s successors must unite us. Though they are not sinless men, we trust in God’s protection for their solemn teachings and thus preserve union through the prayers of the Lord for Peter.

And boy do we need it! We Catholics are a difficult lot. Shepherding Catholics is harder than herding cats. But thanks be to God for the Lord’s Prayer and for the Holy Spirit. If it were not for these, the Church wouldn’t have lasted twenty minutes! But here we are more than two thousand years later, not without our troubles and tensions, but here and fundamentally united (with legitimate diversity). There is just no other way to describe the fundamental unity of the Catholic Church for all these years than as a miracle.

Compare this to the Protestant denominations, which severed their ties to Simon Peter and have now divided and subdivided some thirty thousand times—sifted like wheat to say the least. And the divisions are not just about minor things like vestments or the type of music. The differences are about fundamental and essential doctrines such as how one is saved, if once saved means always saved, if Baptism is necessary, if adultery is grounds for divorce, whether homosexual acts are sinful, if abortion is wrong, whether there is a priesthood, and how critical texts of the Bible are to be understood. The moral and doctrinal divisions are deep and concern foundational matters related to salvation. So divided is Protestantism that many Evangelicals have more in common with Catholics (on the moral issues) than with the old, mainline Protestants.

The tragic disunity of Christendom is not entirely the fault of the Protestants. We Catholics contributed to breaks that happened in the 12^th century (with the Orthodox) and the 16^th century (with the Protestants).

But the disunity among Protestants does put to the lie that people can be united by a book or by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (apart from the authentic discernment of the Church’s magisterium).

The simple fact is that we have to have a pope. And if no one is pope, everyone is pope. Some may be dismissive of the need for “some pope” to tell them what to think. But truth be told, by not acknowledging some visible authority outside their own mind, they are merely appointing themselves as pope of their own little “denomination of one.”

The pope is not possessed of unlimited power. He is the Servant of Divine Revelation, not its source. He cannot overrule dogmatically defined faith that comes from Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition. Neither does he micromanage every aspect of Church life. But in service of the Lord’s prayer and vision, Simon Peter and his successors strengthen and unite us by working with the bishops to resolve significant matters that arise in the Church in terms of discipline and the understanding of doctrine.

But without him, we are trouble, serious trouble—trouble times thirty thousand!

In welcoming Pope Francis, we welcome the visible source of our unity. It is not merely that Jorge Bergoglio is a good negotiator. Whatever personal skills he may have, our faith lies not in those skills but in the prayer of the Lord Jesus for him to strengthen and unify us. Unity is not always easy. To accept the leadership of another is, frankly, hard. But the unity the Lord intends us to have with Simon Peter is a lot easier than the endless divisions we create on our own, apart from the Lord’s Prayer for Peter.

Welcome Pope Francis today and pray for unity among all Catholics and Christians. We may have minor differences and even a few hurtful ones, but thank God we don’t have thirty thousand differences!

What and why we Catholics believe about the Pope

Five Things Catholics Believe about the Pope

By Leonard Wathen
9/11/2015

Photo Credit: Flickr/mario dsn

With Pope Francis visiting the United States, there are likely more people wondering what Catholics actually believe about the Pope. Here is a brief summary.
#1 – He is the Successor of Peter
When Jesus Christ established his Church, he appointed Simon to lead it. Jesus even changed Simon’s name, saying, “[Y]ou are Peter [which means “Rock”], and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18). Early Christian writings show that the bishop of Rome, later called “the pope,” was seen as the successor of St. Peter.¹ Pope Francis is his 265th successor.
#2 – He is only Human
In case it’s not obvious, Catholics know that every Pope is only human like the rest of us. Even though he has an essential role in God’s plan, the Pope can make bad decisions both in his personal life and in managing the Church. Many Popes have been declared saints because of their great Christian virtue, but even the most saintly Pope isn’t perfect. After all, St. Peter himself denied Jesus three times.
#3 – He is the Vicar of Christ
“Vicar” means “representative.” Although Jesus Christ is the “head of the Church” (Ephesians 5:23), Jesus appointed St. Peter and his successors to lead the Church in his name. Jesus is the Rock, but he called Peter the “Rock.” Jesus is the Good Shepherd, but he told Peter, “Feed my lambs” (John 21:15). Jesus holds the keys of the kingdom, but told St. Peter, “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 16:16). Again, this doesn't mean that the Pope is perfect, but it does mean that those who wish to follow Christ have a responsibility to accept the Pope's authority.
#4 – He Can Teach Infallibly Concerning Faith and Morals
When Jesus gave Peter the keys of the kingdom, he said, “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16:19). In Judaism, “keys” were a symbol of teaching authority. Whenever a Pope definitively declares a teaching concerning faith or morals to be “binding” on the Church, the Catholic Church trusts that the Holy Spirit protects him from teaching error.² This gift of the Holy Spirit, called “infallibility,” applies to official, dogmatic teachings of the Pope, not his off-the-cuff remarks.
#5 – His Mission is the Unity of the Church
Jesus Christ desires His Church to be “one flock, [with] one shepherd” (John 10:16). By governing the Church in Christ’s name and teaching Christ’s truth with authority, the Pope serves as “the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity” of the entire Church.³ Even though the papacy is an office of great authority, the Pope is meant to be the “servant of the servants of God,” helping all Christians to follow Christ in truth and in charity.⁴

---

Footnotes

1. See http://www.catholic.com/tracts/peters-roman-residency
2. Catechism of the Catholic Church 891
3. Lumen Gentium 23, Catechism of the Catholic Church 882
4. See http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13737a.htm

Apologia for the office of the Pope

Refuting Papal Myths - "The Papacy is Unbiblical and Unhistorical"

Trent Horn

September 21, 2015

---

 

Pope Francis in St. Peter's Square

As Pope Francis travels through the United States during his visit to the World Congress of Families in Pennsylvania, expect critics of all stripes to be denouncing him and his office. That’s why this week we will be publishing a series of posts that refute these pernicious myths about the office of the Papacy as well as those who have held that office.
Myth #1 - The papacy is not found in the Bible.
It’s true the word papacy is not in the Bible, but neither are the words Trinity or Bible found there. This argument assumes that all Christian doctrine is explicitly described in the Bible, even though this teaching itself is not found in Scripture. Catholics believe, on the other hand, that divine revelation comes from God’s word given to us in written form (Sacred Scripture) and oral form (Sacred Tradition), both of which testify to the existence of the papacy.
According to Scripture, Christ founded a visible Church that would never go out of existence and had authority to teach and discipline believers (see Matt. 16:18-19, 18:17). St. Paul tells us this Church is “the pillar and foundation of truth” (1 Tim. 3:15) and it was built on “the foundation of the apostles” (Eph. 2:20). Paul also tells us the Church would have a hierarchy composed of deacons (1 Tim. 2:8-13); presbyters, from where we get the English word priest (1 Tim. 5:17); and bishops (1 Tim. 3:1-7).
Paul even instructed one of these bishops, Titus, to appoint priests on the island of Crete (Titus 1:5). In A.D. 110, St. Ignatius of Antioch told his readers,

“Follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop.” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 8)

Unlike the apostles, Christ’s Church would exist for all ages, so the apostle’s passed on to their successors the authority to bind and loose doctrine (see Matt. 18:18), forgive sins (see John 20:23), and speak on behalf of Christ (see Luke 10:16). Acts 1:20, for example, records how after Judas’s death Peter proclaimed that Judas’s office (or, in Greek, his bishoporic) would be transferred to a worthy successor. In 1 Timothy 5:22, Paul warned Timothy to “not be hasty in the laying on of hands” when he appointed new leaders in the church.
At the end of the first century, Clement of Rome, who according to ancient tradition was ordained by Peter himself, wrote,

“Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop . . . [so they made preparations that] . . . if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry” (Letter to the Corinthians 44:1–3).

Just as the apostles’ authority was passed on their successors, Peter’s authority as the leader of the apostles and the rock on whom the Church was built (Matt 16:18) was passed on to his successor. This man inherited the keys to the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 16:19) and Peter’s duty to shepherd Christ’s flock (see John 21:15-17). Peter’s successor was the pastor of Christ’s church and a spiritual father to the Lord’s children (1 Cor. 4:15), thus explaining his offices future title pope, which comes from papa, the Latin word for father.
Myth #2 - The Bishop of Rome had no special authority in the early Church. Peter was never even in Rome!
Both the New Testament and the early Church Fathers testify to Peter being in Rome. At the end of his first letter, Peter says he is writing from “Babylon” (5:13), which was a common code word for Rome, because both empires were lavish persecutors of God’s people (see Rev. 17-18; Oxford Dictionary of the Popes, 6).
In the words of Protestant scholar D.A. Carson, Peter was “in Rome about 63 (the probable date of 1 Peter). Eusebius implies that Peter was in Rome during the reign of Claudius, who died in 54 (H.E. 2.14.6)” (An Introduction to the New Testament, 180). Peter may not have always been present in Rome (which would explain why Paul does not address him in his epistle to the Romans), but there is a solid tradition that Peter founded the Church in Rome and later died there.
For example, Paul says the Roman Church was founded by “another man” (Rom. 15:21), and St. Ignatius of Antioch told the Christians in Rome he would not command them in the same way Peter had previously commanded them. At the end of the second century, St. Irenaeus wrote, “The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome], they handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus” (Against Heresies 3:3:3).
A priest named Gaius who lived during Irenaeus’s time even told a heretic named Proclus that “the trophies of the apostles” (i.e., their remains) were buried at Vatican Hill (Eusebius, Church History 2:25:5). Indeed, archaeological evidence unearthed in the twentieth century revealed a tomb attributed to Peter underneath St. Peter’s basilica in Rome. According to the Oxford Dictionary of Saints, “it is probable that the tomb is authentic. It is also significant that Rome is the only city that ever claimed to be Peter’s place of death” (353).
In regard to the authority of the Bishop of Rome as Peter’s successor, in the first century Clement of Rome (the fourth pope) intervened in a dispute in the Church of Corinth. He warned those who disobeyed him that they would “involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger,” thus demonstrating his authority over non-Roman Christians.
St. Ignatius of Antioch referred to the Roman Church as the one that teaches other churches and “presides in love” over them. In fact, the writings of Pope Clement (A.D. 92-99) and Pope Soter (A.D. 167-174) were so popular that they were read in the Church alongside Scripture (Eusebius, Church History 4:23:9).
In A.D. 190, Pope St. Victor I excommunicated an entire region of churches for refusing to celebrate Easter on its proper date. While St. Irenaeus thought this was not prudent, neither he nor anyone else denied that Victor had the authority to do this. Indeed, Irenaeus said, “it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church [Rome] on account of its preeminent authority” (Against Heresies, 3.3.2).
Keep in mind that all of this evidence dates a hundred to two hundred years before Christianity was legalized in the Roman Empire, thus deflating the Fundamentalist theory that the papacy was created by the Roman emperor in the fourth century.
Some people object that if Peter and his successors had special authority, why didn’t Christ say so when the apostles argued about “who was the greatest” (Luke 22:24)? The reason is that Christ did not want to contribute to their misunderstanding that one of them would be a privileged king. Jesus did say, however, that among the apostles there would be a “greatest” who would rule as a humble servant (Luke 22:26). That’s why since the sixth century popes have called themselves servus servorum Dei, or “servant of the servants of God.”
Pope Gregory I used the title in his dispute with the Patriarch of Constantinople John the Faster, who called himself the “Universal Bishop.” Gregory didn’t deny that one bishop had primacy over all the others,  since in his twelfth epistle Gregory explcitly says Constaninople was subject to the authority of the pope. Instead, he denied that the pope was the bishop of every individual territory, since this would rob his brother bishops of their legitimate authority, even though they were still subject to him as Peter’s successor.
This post excerpted from Trent Horn’s article “Defending the Papacy.” The full article can be found in this month’s issue of Catholic Answers Magazine, available for digital download here.