Newspaper Page Text
4
THE BULLETIN OF THE CATHOLIC LAYMEN’S
ASSOCIATION OF GEORGIA
Father had revealed to Peter His Divinity, and then
solemnly affirmed to Peter that he would be the foun
dation on which He would build His Church, and
promised to him the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,
or supreme authority in His Church.
St. Gregory, whom I have already quoted, says:
“To all who know the Gospel it is clear that to Peter,
the Prince of the Apostles, the care of all the Church
was committed by the Lord. To him was said:
Thou art Peter, to thee I will give the keys of the
Kingdom of Heaven. Behold he receives the keys
of the Heavenly Kingdom. The power of binding
and loosing is his care, and the government of the
whole Church is granted. These words were written
over thirteen hundred years ago. Certainly it can
not be asserted that our belief in the Primacy of
Peter is modern.
He Prayed for Peter.
In the XXII. Chapter of St. Luke (thirty-first verse)
we find Christ saying to Peter: “Simon, Satan had
desired to have you that he might sift you as wheat;
but I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not, and
thou being converted confirm thy brethren.” In
these words Christ stated that the Devil was desirous
to have all the Apostles, but that He, Christ, had
prayed particularly for Peter, whom He charged to
confirm the others. All were sought and for one
Christ prayed. And that one was the one whom
Christ had said should be the sure foundation of His
Church. On the stability of the foundation depended
the stability of the Church, and so Christ especially
prayed for Peter that his faith should not fail.
As to the other Apostles, they were to be con
firmed in faith by Peter: "And thou being con
verted confirm thy brethren.” Reading the Scrip
tures we find that Christ sent the twelve with power
to teach all nations and promised His Presence with
them to the end of time. To Peter He gave the
same mission with the rest, but He also gave to him
the fuller authority of confirming the faith of the
other Apostles.
In St. Johns Gospel (XXI-15) we find Christ say
ing to Peter: Simon, son of John, lovest thou Me
more than these? And Peter answered: “Lord,
Thou knowest that I love Thee.” And Christ said to
him: "Feed My Lambs.” And again and a third
time did He propose the self-same question to Peter.
And again to asseveration of his love did Christ say:
“Feed My Lambs, Feed My Sheep.” These words
were spoken directly to Peter, and unquestionably
they are to be understood as addressed to Peter alone
and exclusively. Again, they are not an exhortation
or advice, but a command: “Feed My Lambs, Feed
My Sheep. Our Lord made use of a simile or figure
with which the people were very familiar, for they
were a pastoral people. The duties of a shepherd
may be thus stated: (a) To provide proper pasture
for the flock and lead them to it; (b) To keep the
flock together and prevent them straying away; (c)
To defend the flock against the attacks of enemies,
wolves and the like.
It need hardly be said that the words, “feeding the
flock,” imply full authority over the flock. This is
clear from sacred as well as profane writers. Christ,
our Divine Lord, frequently spoke of Himself as the
Shepherd of the flock. Hence when He ‘gave to
Peter the duty of feeding both the sheep and the
Iambs, that is, the whole flock, He gave him the full
ness of His own power and authority in the Church.
There shall be, said Christ, but one Fold and one
Shepherd.
In the Book of Zacharias (XIII-7) we read: **My
sheep are scattered because there is no shepherd.”
And in the same inspired writer: “Awake, O sword,
against My shepherd and against the man that cleav-
eth to Me, saith the Lord of hosts; strike the shep
herd and the sheep shall be scattered.” No one can
forget our Lord's words where He proclaims Himself
the Good Shepherd and adds that the “Good Shep
herd layeth down His life for the sheep." To Peter,
then, both the power and the duty of feeding, lead
ing and keeping in unity the entire flock of Christ
were confided by the Lord.
There seems to be a rather widespread idea that
this Primacy of Peter was not known to Peter and
the rest of the Apostles, for had it been, we would
certainly have traces of it in the Gospels. I might
say to this argument that there is a large number of
very intelligent persons who deny that there is a
word in the Bible which states that Christ is God.
There is a large number of sincere persons who deny
the Trinity, the Virgin birth of Christ, the resurrec
tion of the Lord, and many other Christian truths,
and they read the Bible. The rest of us say these
things are in the Bible explicitly or implicitly. I s it
well, then, to conclude from the silence of the Bible?
However, is it true that there is no evidence of the
exercise of the Primacy in the Bible?
It is known that the traitor, Judas, hanged himself,
thus leaving eleven Apostles to carry on the work.
They had been selected by Christ. There does not
seem to be any particular reason why the eleven
could not carry on the work, and there is no ac
count that Christ wished the number of twelve to be
preserved. Now let us see what the Holy Scriptures
say: “In these days Peter rising up in the midst of
the brethren said: ‘The Scriptures must needs be
fulfilled which the Holy Ghost spake before by the
mouth of David. Wherefore, of these men who have
companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus
came in and went out with us; one of these must be
made a witness with us to His resurrection.’ And at
Peter’s word Matthias was made an Apostle.” Does
not this suggest the exercise of authority on the part
of Peter?
When the Apostles had received the Holy Spirit
and came down from the upper chamber it was Peter
who first proclaimed Christ to the people as is told in
Acts 11, 14 to 42. And three thousand persons were
by him converted to the Church, of which he was
the foundation. Does it not seem peculiar that when
the first conversions were made Peter was the one
speaking? In Acts V, to 12, we read that Peter and
(Continued on Page 14.)