J
jinc1019
Guest
Ok, as many of you know by now, it’s not uncommon for me to find problems with certain Catholic views on things…Up until very recently, I have accepted the authority of the Pope despite not believing in papal infallibility, but more recently, Orthodox arguments against authority have led me to question that as well.
In this case, however, I am NOT saying that the problem I am about to present means papal authority is wrong…all I am saying is that the common Catholic argument invoking Isaiah 22 may be incorrect (or maybe not!).
As many of you know, in Mathew 16:19, Jesus says to Peter: "19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
Now many Catholic apologists, as well as those who oppose Catholic views, have suggested that the “keys” are a reference to Isaiah 22. I am not here to dispute this, as some Orthodox and others seem to have done in the past. I am, however, wondering how Isaiah 22 actually provides the authority the Church claims.
The reason Isaiah 22 is important for Catholics is because a major criticism of papal authority has often been, especially from Protestants, that “Yes, Peter was given authority, but that doesn’t mean his successors were!”
Catholics often then point to Isaiah 22 on this matter, saying that in that passage, the keys are a clear mark of dynastic authority, a mark of an office that must be filled the same way the office of Judas was filled after he killed himself.
Isaiah 22:15-25 reads as follows:
"Thus says the Lord God of hosts: Come, go to this steward, to Shebna, who is master of the household, and say to him: 16 What right do you have here? Who are your relatives here, that you have cut out a tomb here for yourself, cutting a tomb on the height, and carving a habitation for yourself in the rock? 17 The Lord is about to hurl you away violently, my fellow. He will seize firm hold on you, 18 whirl you round and round, and throw you like a ball into a wide land; there you shall die, and there your splendid chariots shall lie, O you disgrace to your master’s house! 19 I will thrust you from your office, and you will be pulled down from your post.
20 On that day I will call my servant Eliakim son of Hilkiah, 21 and will clothe him with your robe and bind your sash on him. I will commit your authority to his hand, and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and no one shall shut; he shall shut, and no one shall open. 23 I will fasten him like a peg in a secure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his ancestral house. 24 And they will hang on him the whole weight of his ancestral house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. 25 On that day, says the Lord of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a secure place will give way; it will be cut down and fall, and the load that was on it will perish, for the Lord has spoken."
Here, the “keys” symbolize dynastic succession, as Scott Hahn and others would argue. But, notice that at the very beginning of the story, the previous man who held the position now being given to Eliakim (the one being given the keys), was Shebna. And Shebna had his authority, meaning his keys, taken away from him because of pride. Doesn’t this suggest that authority can be lost? After all, Shebna, who lost his authority, was once the possessor of the keys himself.
In this case, however, I am NOT saying that the problem I am about to present means papal authority is wrong…all I am saying is that the common Catholic argument invoking Isaiah 22 may be incorrect (or maybe not!).
As many of you know, in Mathew 16:19, Jesus says to Peter: "19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
Now many Catholic apologists, as well as those who oppose Catholic views, have suggested that the “keys” are a reference to Isaiah 22. I am not here to dispute this, as some Orthodox and others seem to have done in the past. I am, however, wondering how Isaiah 22 actually provides the authority the Church claims.
The reason Isaiah 22 is important for Catholics is because a major criticism of papal authority has often been, especially from Protestants, that “Yes, Peter was given authority, but that doesn’t mean his successors were!”
Catholics often then point to Isaiah 22 on this matter, saying that in that passage, the keys are a clear mark of dynastic authority, a mark of an office that must be filled the same way the office of Judas was filled after he killed himself.
Isaiah 22:15-25 reads as follows:
"Thus says the Lord God of hosts: Come, go to this steward, to Shebna, who is master of the household, and say to him: 16 What right do you have here? Who are your relatives here, that you have cut out a tomb here for yourself, cutting a tomb on the height, and carving a habitation for yourself in the rock? 17 The Lord is about to hurl you away violently, my fellow. He will seize firm hold on you, 18 whirl you round and round, and throw you like a ball into a wide land; there you shall die, and there your splendid chariots shall lie, O you disgrace to your master’s house! 19 I will thrust you from your office, and you will be pulled down from your post.
20 On that day I will call my servant Eliakim son of Hilkiah, 21 and will clothe him with your robe and bind your sash on him. I will commit your authority to his hand, and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and no one shall shut; he shall shut, and no one shall open. 23 I will fasten him like a peg in a secure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his ancestral house. 24 And they will hang on him the whole weight of his ancestral house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. 25 On that day, says the Lord of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a secure place will give way; it will be cut down and fall, and the load that was on it will perish, for the Lord has spoken."
Here, the “keys” symbolize dynastic succession, as Scott Hahn and others would argue. But, notice that at the very beginning of the story, the previous man who held the position now being given to Eliakim (the one being given the keys), was Shebna. And Shebna had his authority, meaning his keys, taken away from him because of pride. Doesn’t this suggest that authority can be lost? After all, Shebna, who lost his authority, was once the possessor of the keys himself.
Justin, I just reviewed your posting history and find that you have submitted several threads relating to this topic, – some of which were very lengthly, and gave you the best of Catholic answers.
