The idea that Jesus set up an apostolic succession in Matthew 16 is unfounded. Contextual exegesis, which I donβt have time to currently demonstrate in this setting, roundly debunks such mythology. Reference to ecclesial tradition to establish apostolic succession is petitio principii, and thus is a non-starter. The only authority Jesus Christ set for His church is Himself; He did not imbue that to popes or pastors. The Gospel is the authority for the church, not any person or institution. Christians in the Bible are witnesses to Godβs authority in Christ; we hold each other to this regulative standard, and prophetically bear witness of Godβs reality in Christ to the world. As such church structures, governments, or organizational strategies have nothing to say to me about my standing before the living God; only the living Christ has that capacity. The problem I am noting isnβt just unique to Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, or higher church liturgically oriented traditions; it is a problem for them, but it is also a problem for low-church, congregational evangelical churches just the same. No pastor has inherent authority to speak authoritatively into someone elseβs life, only Christ has that office. The pastor, as is the reality for all Christians, has a requisite-derivative authority only insofar as they point people to Jesus Christ. Jesus has all authority in heaven and earth to make pronouncements and bring judgments into His peopleβs life apart from mediating that through pastors, church governments, and/or the self-perceived institutional church. The church has no authority to speak authoritatively for the churchβs head who is the Christ.
Nevertheless we see the evangelical churches, the institutional churches (in the Roman Catholic and Orthodox trads), the higher churches in the Reformed, Lutheran, Methodist et al. shot through with this presumption of holding a mantle of authority over peopleβs lives in the name of Jesus Christ. Pastors and church institutions do not have the keys to the Kingdom; only Christ, the son of David does. Pastor, Pope, Bishop you are out of line if you think you live in some sort of genetic line of sacerdotal authority vis-Γ -vis Christ. Why should I pay attention to you? Youβre just a man; youβre not God, nor are you Godβs absolute representative on earth. The Bible does not give you this authority; church tradition is not a viable reference for giving you Godβs authority; and your popularity among the people cannot give you this authority. So why do you think you have such authority? In each case, whether scriptural, traditional, or cultural your case for authority is a non-starter. I stand before God and none other; I donβt stand before you, a man. So repent of your false self-importance and false pretense upon which you stand as a spiritual authority in the church; thatβs not how things operate in the economy of Godβs Kingdom come and will be done. Who are you oh man? . . .
Hi Bobby, new reader here. I really enjoyed this. You write with great passion and insight. Cheers!
Hi Ryan. Thanks for the good word, and welcome to the blog! π
Hi Bobby, I am deeply sympathetic to the viewpoint you eloquently express here, especially to the idea that apostolic succession has no basis in Matthew 16, let alone in the entire NT. My question, however, is how you interpret Matt 16:19, where Jesus grants the keys of the kingdom to Peter (in contrast to your statement where only Christ the son of David, possesses them). Was this spoken for Peter alone and no one else? Do the keys of the kingdom grant him or anyone else the power to include or exclude anyone from the kingdom, to forgive or withhold forgiveness of sins? In other words, what are the keys of the kingdom and what kind of authority is Jesus bestowing, and on whom?
My other question is this: when the author of Hebrews says: “Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account,” what does he mean? What kind of authority do leaders and pastors have? In what are people to obey their leaders?
Thank you, Brett
Hi Brett,
If you read Mt 16 in its broader and parallel context with Mt 18 you’ll note that the keys (if you read it in the Greek) are not just given to Peter, or even the Disciples in the main, but instead to ALL disciples of Jesus Christ. But this is only appreciated in the NT Greek. This fits with something like the Reformation Priesthood of all Believers. I was first alerted to this reading by one of my NT Greek profs in undergrad.
As far as Hebrews or other like passages: I was say, as I did in the post, that the ‘authority’ referred to there is a derivative authority; an authority that is relative to the ‘pastor’s’ faithfulness to an accurate explication of the Gospel reality itself. The Gospel then is not only the “people’s” authority, but it is likewise the “leadership’s” authority. This is how we can discern the ‘Holy’ from the ‘profane’ cf. Heb 5; Lev 10 etc. Jesus taught cf. Mt 23 that we have One teacher One Father etc; I take this in absolute terms. Paul taught in Col Eph etc that there is One Head of the church and we are all individual members of that church. There is no prolongation of the incarnation–contra Roman and Eastern ecclesial gvts and structure—but instead the church, with all of her offices has one ultimate role: viz. to bear witness to her reality and esse who is the Christ, Jesus.