The Two Swords of Peter

[Ron_Conte]

[Luke]
{22:38} So they said, “Lord, behold, there are two swords here.” But he said to them, “It is sufficient.”

These two swords represent the two types of authority of Peter and his successors, and therefore of the Church: the spiritual (teaching) authority, and the temporal authority.

[John]
{18:11} Therefore, Jesus said to Peter: “Set your sword into the scabbard. Should I not drink the chalice which my father has given to me?”

The temporal authority of the Church over secular society is to a great extent sheathed, so that the Church permits secular governments to exercise authority, but, in principle, this is under the authority of the Church. They exercise temporal authority on behalf of the Church (though they often deny this).

The Church does exercise Her temporal authority directly to some extent, such as in Canon Law, in liturgical norms, and in various rulings and other decision of the temporal (or prudential) order.

 

[David_Zampino]

[Luke]
{22:38} So they said, “Lord, behold, there are two swords here.” But he said to them, “It is sufficient.”

These two swords represent the two types of authority of Peter and his successors, and therefore of the Church: the spiritual (teaching) authority, and the temporal authority.

[John]
{18:11} Therefore, Jesus said to Peter: “Set your sword into the scabbard. Should I not drink the chalice which my father has given to me?”

The temporal authority of the Church over secular society is to a great extent sheathed, so that the Church permits secular governments to exercise authority, but, in principle, this is under the authority of the Church. They exercise temporal authority on behalf of the Church (though they often deny this).

The Church does exercise Her temporal authority directly to some extent, such as in Canon Law, in liturgical norms, and in various rulings and other decision of the temporal (or prudential) order.

Can you provide from authoritative sources that your personal interpretation of these two passages is shared by others in the Church – especially in the Hierarchy?

If not, then you need to present this as “personal opinion” and not as a statement of authority.

 

[CWBetts]

Can you provide from authoritative sources that your personal interpretation of these two passages is shared by others in the Church – especially in the Hierarchy?

If not, then you need to present this as “personal opinion” and not as a statement of authority.

Our friend has a habit of presenting his opinion as authoritative. That’s just how he rolls.

 

[David_Zampino]

Our friend has a habit of presenting his opinion as authoritative. That’s just how he rolls.

I’m well aware of this! However, I’ve seen newcomers to this forum “snowed” by Mr. Conte!

 

[Ron_Conte]

The Church is one body, and outside of her, there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins. “One is my dove, my perfect one. One is her mother; elect is she who bore her.” [Canticles 6:8].

But the one mystical body has one head, who is Christ. But God is the head of Christ.
“Yet truly, the head of Christ is God.” [1 Corinthians 11:3]

And this one Church, with Christ as her head, has authority from Christ, not merely over Catholics, but over heaven and earth.

[Matthew]
{28:18} And Jesus, drawing near, spoke to them, saying: “All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth."

{16:19} "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall release on earth shall be released, even in heaven.”

Now as I said in my previous post, the two swords of Peter are the two types of authority in the Church, the spiritual authority and the temporal authority. The one Church holds both types of power. Therefore, the authority of any secular government is under the authority of the Church, and in principle is exercised by the will and permission of the Church.

St. Bernard (De Consideratione, Lib. iv. c. 3) writes:
“And both therefore, are of the Church, specifically, both the spiritual sword and the material. But indeed, the latter is to be exercised on behalf of the Church; and truly the former is to be exercised by the Church; the former is of the priest, the latter is by the hand of the soldier, but truly at the will of the priest and the order of the emperor.”

Hugh of St. Victor (De Sacramentis, II. 2, 4.) writes:
“The spiritual authority holds [the ability] so that it may establish the earthly authority, and holds [the ability] to judge if it might not have been good.”

But the temporal authority includes not only the authority exercised by secular governments on behalf of the Church, but also the same temporal authority exercised by the Church, as occurs in the various disciplines of the Church, such as Canon Law, liturgical norms, etc.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Interesting idea. I think it is valid as an allegorical sense of Scripture. However, sometimes allegory can be taken a bit too far, a la Origen. Just something to think about…

 

[David_Zampino]

Interesting idea. I think it is valid as an allegorical sense of Scripture. However, sometimes allegory can be taken a bit too far, a la Origen. Just something to think about…

Funny you should mention Origen! He started out as an ultra-literalist (hence his, um, self-mutilation!) His move to the extreme end of allegorical interpretation was LITERALLY a “from one extreme to the other” move!

I don’t think that the modern Papacy would view a “two sword” theory in the same sense that some of the high medieval popes (say, Innocent III) did. Probably for the best, too. Too many popes got into too much trouble by neglecting the spiritual in favor of increasing the temporal.

 

[CWBetts]

The Church is one body, and outside of her, there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins. “One is my dove, my perfect one. One is her mother; elect is she who bore her.” [Canticles 6:8].

But the one mystical body has one head, who is Christ. But God is the head of Christ.
“Yet truly, the head of Christ is God.” [1 Corinthians 11:3]

And this one Church, with Christ as her head, has authority from Christ, not merely over Catholics, but over heaven and earth.

[Matthew]
{28:18} And Jesus, drawing near, spoke to them, saying: “All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth."

{16:19} "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall release on earth shall be released, even in heaven.”

Now as I said in my previous post, the two swords of Peter are the two types of authority in the Church, the spiritual authority and the temporal authority. The one Church holds both types of power. Therefore, the authority of any secular government is under the authority of the Church, and in principle is exercised by the will and permission of the Church.

St. Bernard (De Consideratione, Lib. iv. c. 3) writes:
“And both therefore, are of the Church, specifically, both the spiritual sword and the material. But indeed, the latter is to be exercised on behalf of the Church; and truly the former is to be exercised by the Church; the former is of the priest, the latter is by the hand of the soldier, but truly at the will of the priest and the order of the emperor.”

Hugh of St. Victor (De Sacramentis, II. 2, 4.) writes:
“The spiritual authority holds [the ability] so that it may establish the earthly authority, and holds [the ability] to judge if it might not have been good.”

But the temporal authority includes not only the authority exercised by secular governments on behalf of the Church, but also the same temporal authority exercised by the Church, as occurs in the various disciplines of the Church, such as Canon Law, liturgical norms, etc.

I am sorry, but your interpretation does not fall in line with the Vatican II document or
religious liberty.

 

[Ron_Conte]

“We are instructed in the Gospel sayings that in Her and within Her power, there are two swords, specifically, the spiritual and the temporal. For the Apostles say, “Behold, there are two swords here,” that is, in the Church. But when the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not respond, “it is too much,” but “it is sufficient.” [Luke 22:38] Certainly, whoever denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter, misunderstands the word of the Lord, saying: “Put your sword into its sheath.” [Matthew 26:52] Therefore, both are in the power of the Church, namely, the spiritual sword and the material. But indeed, the latter is to be exercised on behalf of the Church; and truly, the former is to be exercised by the Church. The former is of the priest; the latter is by the hand of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest.”
Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, n. 4.
catholicplanet.com/TSM/Unam-Sanctam-index.htm

 

[Randy_Carson]

[Luke]
{22:38} So they said, “Lord, behold, there are two swords here.” But he said to them, “It is sufficient.”

These two swords represent the two types of authority of Peter and his successors, and therefore of the Church: the spiritual (teaching) authority, and the temporal authority.

[John]
{18:11} Therefore, Jesus said to Peter: “Set your sword into the scabbard. Should I not drink the chalice which my father has given to me?”

The temporal authority of the Church over secular society is to a great extent sheathed, so that the Church permits secular governments to exercise authority, but, in principle, this is under the authority of the Church. They exercise temporal authority on behalf of the Church (though they often deny this).

The Church does exercise Her temporal authority directly to some extent, such as in Canon Law, in liturgical norms, and in various rulings and other decision of the temporal (or prudential) order.

Interesting stuff, Ron.

One question: In your opinion, is Benedict XVI a validly elected successor of Peter?

Thanks.

 

[David_Zampino]

Interesting stuff, Ron.

One question: In your opinion, is Benedict XVI a validly elected successor of Peter?

Thanks.

I’ve asked him similar questions on a number of occasions, and have yet to receive a response.

 

[Ron_Conte]

Interesting stuff, Ron.
One question: In your opinion, is Benedict XVI a validly elected successor of Peter?

The teaching of the Church expessed by any Pope or Council, including Pope Boniface VIII is required belief, and not merely ‘interesting stuff.’

The valid Ecumenical Councils of the Church are 21, from the Council of Nicaea through the Second Vatican Council.
piar.hu/councils/

Popes Benedict XVI, John Paul II, John Paul I, Paul VI, John XXIII, and all the other popes from Peter to the present day are valid successors of Peter. Each and all of them possess both of the swords of Peter, that is, the spiritual authority and the temporal authority.
newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm

The temporal authority, as Pope Boniface explains in his interpretation of Scripture, is to a great extent sheathed as regards secular society. For the Church permits secular governments to rule, even though in priniciple all nations and all humanity are under the full authority of the Church, both spiritual and temporal. In principle, they exercise temporal authority on behalf of the Church, under the Church’s direction.

But the Church does exercise Her temporal authority directly, in Canon Law, liturgical norms, decisions of the Holy See and of individual Bishops Conferences, and individual Bishops on temporal matters. In this way the Church exercises her temporal authority directly; whereas through secular governments, the Church exercises her temporal authority indirectly, by the hands of kings and soldiers, to use the figure of speech also used in Unam Sanctam.

The teaching of Unam Sanctam is the teaching of the Magisterium and is required belief.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Popes Benedict XVI, John Paul II, John Paul I, Paul VI, John XXIII, and all the other popes from Peter to the present day are valid successors of Peter.

Just checking. Thanks.

 

[David_Zampino]

The teaching of the Church expessed by any Pope or Council, including Pope Boniface VIII is required belief, and not merely ‘interesting stuff.’

The teaching of Unam Sanctam is the teaching of the Magisterium and is required belief.

However, Ron, YOUR INTERPRETATION of said teaching does not necessarily equate to the Magisterium’s interpretation, and your interpretation IS NOT required belief.

There is a difference.

 

[Ron_Conte]

These two types of authority of the Church are sometimes represented under the figure of two swords, and other times under the figure of two keys. The symbol of two keys crossed, one gold and one silver, is found in the papal coat of arms of Popes Benedict XVI, John Paul II, John Paul I, Paul VI, John XXIII, Pius XII, and other Popes, as well as in the Vatican coat of arms and the Vatican flag. The gold key represents the spiritual authority, and the silver key represents the temporal authority. The figure of gold is used for the spiritual authority, compared to silver for the temporal authority, because the spiritual authority is more important than the temporal authority. However, the Church, and especially the Pope as the Vicar of Christ, has always possessed both types of authority.

Each and every Pope, including Peter and all of his valid successors, through to the present Pope, Benedict XVI, each and every Roman Pontiff, has the same full authority, spiritual and temporal, given by Christ to Peter and thereby to the Church. It is not possible for the authority of the successors of Peter to diminish, nor to increase, beyond what Christ gifted to the Church in the office of the Bishop of Rome.

 

[WynCatholic]

[Luke]
{22:38} So they said, “Lord, behold, there are two swords here.” But he said to them, “It is sufficient.”

See 1 Samuel 13:22 and context. The LORD will fight with/for the people of God.
In the event fighting is required, God will provide victory for the people of God, even when out numbered and out armed.

 

[Ron_Conte]

See 1 Samuel 13:22 and context. The LORD will fight with/for the people of God.
In the event fighting is required, God will provide victory for the people of God, even when out numbered and out armed.

The Papal Magisterium has taught the meaning, in the spiritual sense, of the two swords.

1. We are instructed in the Gospel sayings that in Her and within Her power, there are two swords, specifically, the spiritual and the temporal. For the Apostles say, “Behold, there are two swords here,” that is, in the Church. But when the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not respond, “it is too much,” but “it is sufficient.” [Luke 22:38] Certainly, whoever denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter, misunderstands the word of the Lord, saying: “Put your sword into its sheath.” [Matthew 26:52] Therefore, both are in the power of the Church, namely, the spiritual sword and the material. But indeed, the latter is to be exercised on behalf of the Church; and truly, the former is to be exercised by the Church. The former is of the priest; the latter is by the hand of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest. Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam.

So it is not a matter of opinion or personal interpretation.

 

[Sir_Knight]

The Church is one body, and outside of her, there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins. “One is my dove, my perfect one. One is her mother; elect is she who bore her.” [Canticles 6:8].

Given the fact that this disagrees with official Church teaching as outlined in CCC847 …
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

… your other conclusions are also placed in doubt.

 

[Ron_Conte]

Given the fact that this disagrees with official Church teaching as outlined in CCC847 …
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

… your other conclusions are also placed in doubt.

The passage to which you refer is from Unam Sanctam, by Pope Boniface VIII: “The Church is one body, and outside of her, there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins. “One is my dove, my perfect one. One is her mother; elect is she who bore her.” [Canticles 6:8].”

This same teaching was taught by the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Florence. **It is a required belief of the Catholic Faith that outside the Church there is no salvation. **

The passage from the Catechism does not contradict that teaching, but only explains it further. See also this explanation from Pope John Paul II:

“Since Christ brings about salvation through his Mystical Body, which is the Church, the way of salvation is connected essentially with the Church. The axiom ‘extra ecclesiam nulla salus’ - ‘outside the Church there is no salvation’ - stated by St. Cyprian (Epist. 73, 21; PL 1123 AB), belongs to the Christian tradition. It was included in the Fourth Lateran Council (DS 802), in the Bull ‘Unam Sanctam’ of Boniface VIII (DS 870) and the Council of Florence (Decretum pro Jacobitis, DS 1351). The axiom means that for those who are not ignorant of the fact that the Church has been established as necessary by God through Jesus Christ, there is an obligation to enter the Church and remain in her in order to attain salvation (cf. LG 14). For those, however, who have not received the Gospel proclamation, as I wrote in the Encyclical ‘Redemptoris Missio,’ salvation is accessible in mysterious ways, inasmuch as divine grace is granted to them by virtue of Christ’s redeeming sacrifice, without external membership in the Church, but nonetheless always in relation to her (cf. Redemptoris Missio, n. 10). It is a mysterious relationship. It is mysterious for those who receive the grace, because they do not know the Church and sometimes even outwardly reject her. It is also mysterious in itself, because it is linked to the saving mystery of grace, which includes an essential reference to the Church the Savior founded. In order to take effect, saving grace requires acceptance, cooperation, a ‘yes’ to the divine gift. This acceptance is, at least implicitly, oriented to Christ and the Church. Thus it can also be said that ‘sine ecclesia nulla salus’ - ‘without the Church there is no salvation.’ Belonging to the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, however implicitly and indeed mysteriously, is an essential condition for salvation.”

Also, it is absurd to claim that one supposed error places in doubt all other theological assertions by the same person. This claim would in effect denigrate all theology, since no theologian is infallible. Instead, each theological argument stands or falls on its own merits. A theologian might be correct on one point, and incorrect on another. But if we take the position that any single error, or claimed error, justifies or necessitates rejection of the entire body of work of that person, then no theologian’s work would stand.

 

[Sir_Knight]

The passage to which you refer is from Unam Sanctam, by Pope Boniface VIII: “The Church is one body, and outside of her, there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins. “One is my dove, my perfect one. One is her mother; elect is she who bore her.” [Canticles 6:8].”

This same teaching was taught by the Fourth Lateran Council and the Council of Florence. **It is a required belief of the Catholic Faith that outside the Church there is no salvation. **

The passage from the Catechism does not contradict that teaching, but only explains it further. See also this explanation from Pope John Paul II:

“Since Christ brings about salvation through his Mystical Body, which is the Church, the way of salvation is connected essentially with the Church. The axiom ‘extra ecclesiam nulla salus’ - ‘outside the Church there is no salvation’ - stated by St. Cyprian (Epist. 73, 21; PL 1123 AB), belongs to the Christian tradition. It was included in the Fourth Lateran Council (DS 802), in the Bull ‘Unam Sanctam’ of Boniface VIII (DS 870) and the Council of Florence (Decretum pro Jacobitis, DS 1351). The axiom means that for those who are not ignorant of the fact that the Church has been established as necessary by God through Jesus Christ, there is an obligation to enter the Church and remain in her in order to attain salvation (cf. LG 14). For those, however, who have not received the Gospel proclamation, as I wrote in the Encyclical ‘Redemptoris Missio,’ salvation is accessible in mysterious ways, inasmuch as divine grace is granted to them by virtue of Christ’s redeeming sacrifice, without external membership in the Church, but nonetheless always in relation to her (cf. Redemptoris Missio, n. 10). It is a mysterious relationship. It is mysterious for those who receive the grace, because they do not know the Church and sometimes even outwardly reject her. It is also mysterious in itself, because it is linked to the saving mystery of grace, which includes an essential reference to the Church the Savior founded. In order to take effect, saving grace requires acceptance, cooperation, a ‘yes’ to the divine gift. This acceptance is, at least implicitly, oriented to Christ and the Church. Thus it can also be said that ‘sine ecclesia nulla salus’ - ‘without the Church there is no salvation.’ Belonging to the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, however implicitly and indeed mysteriously, is an essential condition for salvation.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church was written and approved by Pope John Paul II and it represents the OFFICIAL teaching of the Catholic Church – it says so right there in the introduction … and it CLEARLY states that “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.” … THAT is OFFICIAL Church teaching.

Also, it is absurd to claim that one supposed error places in doubt all other theological assertions by the same person. This claim would in effect denigrate all theology, since no theologian is infallible. Instead, each theological argument stands or falls on its own merits. A theologian might be correct on one point, and incorrect on another. But if we take the position that any single error, or claimed error, justifies or necessitates rejection of the entire body of work of that person, then no theologian’s work would stand.

Doesn’t scripture tell us that we are to judge a tree by the fruit that it produces? Given the fact that you came to the wrong conclusion regarding the above teaching, what does it imply about your other conclusions?