Peter, the Papacy, James, and the other Apostles

         Here is a response to the question that came up in one of the comments to the first Apologetics blog entry. The question concerns Peter's authority in relation to the authority of the other apostles, especially James. It was asked: "What is with the whole pope thing when James was the last to speak at the council in Jerusalem?"

      Jesus founded His Church on Peter as upon a rock. That is why Jesus changed Simon's name to Kephas (Aramaic) or Petros (in Greek) which mean 'rock,' and told him that he would found his Church upon Peter (see Matthew 16:13-18).  Furthermore, in addition to giving Peter the same authority that he imparted to the other apostles, namely, that of binding and loosing and forgiving sins (see Matthew 18:18 and John 20:21-23), Jesus gives Peter the "keys to the kingdom of heaven." The keys of the kingdom are a sign of authority that (see Matthew 16:13-19) Peter receives directly from Christ. In order to understand what it means to receive the "keys of the kingdom" we have to know first that King David had a prime minister, one who represented him and handled his affairs, and it was this prime minister that was said to possess the "keys of the kingdom of David." In the book of Isaiah, chapter 22, verses 19-22, we find a prophecy concerning the keys of the kingdom of David that Christ fulfills in giving those keys over to Peter. Isaiah's king gave the keys of the kigdom of David over to Eliakin, just as Christ gave the keys to His kingdom, the kingdom of heaven, over to Peter. Thus, Christ established Peter as His vicar or prime minister on earth, an honor and a duty not given to any other Apostle.
    This does not mean that Peter is a ruler who has the right to lord his authority over all of the apostles and all members of the Church. Instead, just as Christ came to serve and not to be served (see Mark 10:45), so also Peter is called to be the servant of all the servants of God. Consider the following passages where Peter is singled out by Christ Himself as the chief of the apostles who has a special duty in relation to them: (1) Luke 22:31-32 - Jesus prays for Peter's faith that he would strengthen the other apostles, (2) John 21:15-17 - in a threefold commission Jesus appoints Peter the shepherd of the Church, Jesus' flock.
   Keeping all of these things in mind, I think we can now directly address the question about the authority of Peter in relation to the authority of St. James as it was exercised at the council of Jerusalem. In Acts 15:7-12 after much debate about circumcision, Peter's stands up and speaks to his brothers. These remarks ended the debate. After he spoke, silence ensued throughout the assembly and then Paul and Barnabas recounted to all present the works that God had done through them among the Gentiles. After this, James makes his statement. He refers to the words of Peter and expresses approval for them in their agreement with the words of the prophets. After this he concludes "Therefore, I have reached the decision that we should not trouble the Gentiles who are turning towards God." As the bishop of Jerusalem it is quite fitting that James should be the last person to address the assembly. However, being the last to speak does not mean that he had the highest authority or even that he was equal in authority to Peter. Why?
    Reading the text of Acts of the Apostles, it becomes clear why Peter spoke first and why James spoke last. The reasons for this take into account the context of the council and the circumstances at the time. Prior to the council, Paul and Barnabas had been in Antioch preaching the good news to the Gentiles. Then, as we see in Acts 15:1, "certain individuals came down from Judea," to Antioch, and taught that circumcision was necessary for salvation. There was "no small dissension and debate" (Acts 15:2) among them and so they decided to go to Jerusalem to discuss it with the "apostles and the elders" there. This is a significant detail because it tells us that it was members of the Church of Judea, that is, the Church of Jerusalem, of which St. James was the bishop, who were teaching that circumcision was necessary for salvation.
    At the time of the council, Peter was a refugee from Rome. In Acts 12:17, Peter had fled Jerusalem "for another place" which both Eusebius and Jerome tell us is Rome, because they date his episcopacy in Rome from AD 42. Now the Council of Jerusalem took place in AD 49. So why was Peter there in the first place. He certainly did not hop on a jet and fly over because there was a problem back home. The historian Seutonius reports that all the Jews were expelled from Rome by Emperor Claudius in AD 49 (same year as the Jerusalem council) and their expulsion was because of a riot over someone named "Chrestus" (i.e., "Christus" or Christ). Thus, Peter was among the refugees, and had been led back to Jerusalem by the Holy Spirit, (thereafter to go on to Antioch, after the Council, and then back to Rome after Claudius' death, when Jews could return).) Finally, let us recall that Peter already believed that it was the will of the Lord that the Gentiles should be baptized (see Acts 10:47) and that he had baptized Gentiles prior to this council. James, on the other hand, was the bishop of those who were so teaching (those Judeans who had gone up to Antioch).
       After having gone over the circumstances of the Council, there are a few key facts that manifest the nature of Peter's authority amongst the other Apostles, including James. (1) When the debate had gone on for some time at the council, Peter, a visitor to the Church of Jerusalem, stands up and makes his judgment known. (2) The fact that there was silence in the entire assembly after he spoke and that this silence was followed by the testimony of Paul and Barnabas in support of Peter's teaching regarding the Gentiles, salvation, and circumcision because it spoke of the wonders that God had done for the Gentiles.
     After Peter's statement, spoken by the shepherd of the flock (John 21:15-17), who holds the "keys of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 16:18), and the evidence given by Paul and Barnabas, it should come as no surprise that James would speak last, and not as a sign of his possessing the same authority as Peter. For James was the Bishop of Jerusalem and it was members of his church who had gone up to Antioch and taught that circumcision was necessary for salvation. Thus, it was the duty of James and his place (being the bishop of that region) to address the members of his Church concerning the decision agreed upon by the council and first proposed by Peter. Therefore, James did not speak last as a sign of his equal authority over the church with Peter, rather, it was on account of his being the bishop of that region who had charge over those who were dissenting from the truth about salvation. For each bishop, indeed each Apostle, has authority over the particular church entrusted to him, but it is Peter to whom they looked in matters where a leader was needed, where only the one who had the keys of the kingdom could speak to them on behalf of Christ. (Consider also the other times at which Peter spoke first on behalf of the apostles including his profession of faith at Casarea Phillipi and at Pentecost.)
     That being said, we should not fail to mention that the testimony of the early church Fathers, many of them disciples and successors of theApostles, also bears witness to the constant teaching of the Church with regard to the primacy of the Church of Rome and the Apostolic See of Peter. Consider the words of St. Ignatius of Antioch (disciple of John the Apostle, 3rd bishop of Antioch) who said that it is the Church of Rome which "presides in charity." (Ad. Rom. 1,1) Consider also the words of St. Irenaeus (disciple of Polycarp, martyr and disciple of St. John the Apostle): "For with this church, by reason of its pre-eminence, the whole Church, that is the faithful everywhere, must necessarily be in accord." (Adv. Haeres. 3,3) 
     In conclusion, in addition to all else that we know of the authority that Christ entrusted to authority and in light of that revelation concerning his office as the chief of the Apostles, we can interpret the Acts of the Apostles description of the council of Jerusalem as an expression of the unity of the Church, the primacy of the authority of Peter, and the authority that each Apostle possessed from Christ, which authority they exercised in union with Christ, and in union with the rock upon which he built His Church - Peter the Apostle.

INTRODUCTION REVIEW

So in brief, here is a Introduction (Thanks to the help of Beginning Apologetics 1 by Father Frank Chacon and Jim Burnham!)

Cheat Sheet Review of the Discussion.

1. What is Apologetics? It means, "giving a reasoned explanation of your faith" This means that a Catholic person should charitably explain Catholic Doctrine and teaching by using Common Sense, Scripture, and History.
2. What are some tips for discussing questions of faith with your family and friends?                 A. Remember that your goal is to explain your faith and evangelize, not win an argument. Even in the most heated discussions, you should remain charitable at all times and focus yourself on loving God and His Truth. B. STUDY: You should read the bible 10 minutes a day or at LEAST 30 minutes a week. If you don't have one, get one. Also read the Catechism of the Catholic Church at least once a week. C. FOCUS: During discussion, insist on staying on the main issues. Don't allow someone to ask you 20 questions and expect you to answer them in 10 minutes. There should be plenty of time for answers because you are focused on truth. Also, question time should be equal. Just as they ask you challenging questions so you should be able to ask them challenging questions. D. If you are not familiar with a topic and do not know how to properly answer, there is nothing wrong with saying you need to do research and would like to get back to them on it. E. INTERPRETATION: If your non Catholic brethren misinterpret bible verses to fit their denominational teaching against Catholic doctrine, you should read the verse itself in context and be able to show how it can be interpreted to support Catholic teaching. E. If you are not an expert in Catholic Doctrine, DONT BE AFRAID. Just tell them what you do know politely. F. MOST IMPORTANTLY:  Begin and end discussion in prayer. Calmly end the discussion if the other person is becoming verbally abusive. INSIST that they refrain from making abusive attacks on the Eucharist and Our Lady and ask them to simply state what they disagree with and why they do.
3. Is the Bible the only authority when it comes to matters of faith?    How many times have you heard the phrase: "Well its not in the bible so I don't have to listen to it"? Basically all Protestants claim that the Bible is the only authority in matters of faith. Fancy term for this is called the Protestant doctrine of "Sola Scriptura" (Translation: Scripture Alone) IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT for a Catholic to know why the Bible is not the sole rule of faith and to NOT agree with Protestants on this point. There is something called AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH and SACRED TRADITION. We Catholics accept the authority of the Bible in matters of faith because it is the inspired Word of God, but we do not accept it as the only rule of faith.
4. Why is the Authority of the Church important? Because Christ left a Church to teach, govern, and sanctify in His Name until the end of time. If you reject this authority left on earth by Christ, then you reject Christ and His Gospel.
5. What does the BIBLE say about it?   First of all, no where in the bible does it say to follow Scripture alone. In fact, the doctrine of sola scriptura cannot be found in the bible. Yep, thats right, the bible says that not everything Jesus did and said is recorded in the bible. Read John 21: 25.

 HERES A BIT MORE:  It goes against the bible to think that Christ did not leave an authority. GO AHEAD, get out your bible! Matthew Chapter 16, verses13-20 / Chapter 18, verse 18/ Luke Chapter 10, verse 16. CHRIST PROMISED THAT THIS CHURCH WOULD BE HERE TILL THE END OF TIME!  (Matthew 16:18/Matthew 28: 19-20/John 14: 16) What about Sacred Tradition? The BIBLE says to follow Sacred Tradition along side scripture. Read 2 Thessalonians Chapter 2, verse 15, Chapter 3, verse 6.  Also, the Bible says that we must hold fast to oral tradition, the preached word of God (1 Corinthians 11:2 and 1 Peter 1:25 )

I think thats enough to digest for now. On another day we will have the Topic of Biblical History, where the bible came from, all the different translations, why the Catholic Bible has more books than the Protestant Bible and how that happenend FYI.

Salvation through Apologetics?

             In response to the first post on the blog for The Way I would like to add the following: Apologetics accompanies all of us on the way to heaven. There is obviously a need for evangelization, just like there is obviously a need for catechesis. There is also a need for apologetics. What is the reason for all of this? There are people that have never heard the good news about Jesus. They need to be told. Hence, evangelization. There are people that have heard the good news about Jesus and need to be instructed in it so that they can grow in their faith. Hence, catechesis. But who is apologetics for? If I have been evangelized and I am able to evangelize others, if I know my faith and can even teach it to others, then what need is there for apologetics for me? Aside from evangelization and catechesis, that is, the initial proclamation of the faith and its systematic study in catechesis, why would we need apologetics? Isn't it enough if we simply learn our faith and share it with others?

      For anyone that has ever tried to share their faith with others and be an instrument in bringing them to Christ one thing is clear: our work in the salvation of souls and the conversion of others is very small (in relation to God's), but nonetheless, very important, since if we didn't do it, who would? This does not mean that it is easy work. Most people have their own ideas, their own beliefs, and their own way of looking at themselves, their lives, and their world. Most people are not well disposed to changing their habits and their entire lifestyle merely because of the words that someone speaks to them - especially if those words have to do with a certain poor carpenter from an obscure ancient Roman outpost that died at the hands of his own people thousands of years ago. Apologetics is necessary because if you can give reasons that compel people towards the truth of Christ and His Church, you can give them reasons to move away from whatever false beliefs and ways of living they may have fallen into, and help them to open their hearts to faith in Jesus. It is a special work of disposing those that we love to be more open to the words of Christ and the work of His Holy Spirit. The Father draws us to believe in His Son, but some hearts are hardened. Apologetics is an invaluable tool in breaking through to some of the hardest hearts, no matter where they are coming from.

              Therefore, the question is not so much why is apologetics necessary, rather, it is how serious are we about our faith in Jesus and how seriously do we hold salvation in Christ alone as the goal of human life? Once we have the answer to those questions, we will understand why apologetics are a necessity.

Welcome to "The Way" Apologetics Blog, are you bored?

     If you answered, "sort of" or flat out "yes" than I am not surprised. Most Catholics do not know what Apologetics is all about and if they do, they are almost always bored with the first topic which is the introduction. Come on now: How many of you actually read the Introduction to a book you start? Most of us turn to Chapter 1 and DO NOT READ THE INTRO and that is because most of the time it is either boring or we just want to get to the good stuff.

     BUT with Apologetics we can't skip the intro, because if we are not introduced to apologetics than the rest of the VERY IMPORTANT TOPICS mean absolutely nothing to you and cannot help you defend your faith. Its like trying to become a Doctor and skipping Med school. And no one wants YOU to operate on them. TRANSLATION: No intellegent person wants to hear you defend the Catholic Faith if you can't answer their questions because you don't know how.

   So, on that note, WELCOME TO " THE WAY Apologetics and Hot Topic Blog". Here we will be posting the Apologetics Night Discussion Questions and continue to comment on important topics and concerns that are brought up. Your comments and questions are very welcome and for beginners (we all have to start somewhere) I would suggest scrolling through the different discussion questions under "Introduction Review."

God bless you and Just Follow Him.