Did the Early Church Have a Magisterium? Plus Jesus’ Divinity & Humanity

Readings: Click Here

Looking for Sunday Catholic Word Merchandise? Look no further! Click Here

---

Hey everyone,

 

Welcome to The Sunday Catholic Word, a podcast where we reflect on the upcoming Sunday Mass readings and pick out the details that are relevant for explaining and defending our Catholic faith.

 

I’m Dr. Karlo Broussard, staff apologist and speaker for Catholic Answers, and the host for this podcast.

 

In today’s episode, we’re going to focus on two details in the first reading and one detail in the Gospel reading that are relevant for doing apologetics. The details in the first reading, which is taken from Acts 15:1-2, 22-29, relate to the topic of the magisterium and the role it has in relation to theological and disciplinary issues in the Church. The second detail, found in the Gospel reading, which is taken from John 14:23-29, relates to both Jesus’ divinity and humanity.

 

Let’s get started with the first reading. Here it is in its entirety:

 

Some who had come down from Judea were instructing the brothers,
“Unless you are circumcised according to the Mosaic practice,
you cannot be saved.”
Because there arose no little dissension and debate
by Paul and Barnabas with them,
it was decided that Paul, Barnabas, and some of the others
should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders
about this question.

The apostles and elders, in agreement with the whole church,
decided to choose representatives
and to send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas.
The ones chosen were Judas, who was called Barsabbas,
and Silas, leaders among the brothers.
This is the letter delivered by them:

“The apostles and the elders, your brothers,
to the brothers in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia
of Gentile origin: greetings.
Since we have heard that some of our number
who went out without any mandate from us
have upset you with their teachings
and disturbed your peace of mind,
we have with one accord decided to choose representatives
and to send them to you along with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,
who have dedicated their lives to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
So we are sending Judas and Silas
who will also convey this same message by word of mouth:
‘It is the decision of the Holy Spirit and of us
not to place on you any burden beyond these necessities,
namely, to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols,
from blood, from meats of strangled animals,
and from unlawful marriage.
If you keep free of these,
you will be doing what is right.  Farewell.’”

 

The first thing to note is the controversy that came about. Luke tells us, “Some who had come down from Judea were instructing the brothers, ‘Unless you are circumcised according to the Mosaic practice, you cannot be saved.’ And this was no small issue. Luke reports, “There arose no little dissension and debate.”

So, we have a theological controversy that arose in the first century Church concerning how to be saved. Again, no small matter. It was such a big issue that Paul and Barnabas couldn’t settle it by themselves. Consequently, we’re told they decided to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders to consider the matter.

 

Now, what’s interesting about this so far is that they follow the exact prescription of Jesus given in Matthew 18:15-17. Here’s what Jesus says there:

 

¹⁵ “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. ¹⁶ But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. ¹⁷ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the Church; and if he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. ¹⁸ Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

 

For the first century Christians, some of the brethren were sinning by preaching false doctrine. Paul and Barnabas try to settle the matter to no avail. So, they follow Jesus’ prescript and “take it to the Church,” represented by the gathering of the apostles and elders.

 

Now, the rest of our first reading only gives us what the gathering of apostles and elders decided concerning issues that go beyond the key theological question that Luke highlights at the beginning of Acts 15—whether Gentiles need to be circumcised to be saved. The issues that the rest of the passage speaks of are abstaining from 1) meats sacrificed to idols, 2) from blood, 3) from meats of strangled animals, and 4) from unlawful marriage.

 

We’re still left with the question: what did the apostles and elders decide concerning the theological question of whether circumcision is necessary for salvation?

 

To answer this question, we must look at verses 7-11, which are left out of our first reading text. When we look at these verses, we notice that it’s not the body of apostles and elders gathered that settle the question. Rather, it’s Peter who takes the initiative and settles the matter himself, authoritatively. Luke reports,

 

6 The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. 7 And after there had been much debate, Peter rose and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 And God who knows the heart bore witness to them, giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us; 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, but cleansed their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why do you make trial of God by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.”

 

Notice, no one else took the initiative to settle the debate. It was Peter. Moreover, Luke tells us there was “much debate” in verse 6, narrates Peter’s declaration on the matter, and then in verse 12 says, “and all the assembly kept silence.” It seems that Peter’s declaration settled the debate.

 

Some Christians might counter and say that Luke simply is saying they remained silent to hear what Paul and Barnabas had to say about their ministry in the next verse: “and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles” (v.13).

 

But Luke doesn’t say, “they remained silent in order to listen to Paul and Barnabas had to say.”  Rather, Luke just narrates: there was much debate, Peter gives the speech, and there was silence, and the assembly listened to Paul and Barnabas. It seems to me the “silence” more reasonably pertains to there being no more debate given that Peter spoke rather than explaining that the assembly fell silent to listen to Paul and Barnabas. According to the flow of Luke’s narrative, the debate would have continued on without Peter’s declaration. Consequently, without Peter’s declaration Paul and Barnabas would never have been able to tell their stories.

 

Luke then tells us that James stands up, affirms Peter’s teaching, and proposes the four precepts listed before that they should impose upon Gentile Christians.

 

Now, you might be wondering, “What’s the apologetic significance of all this?”

 

First, it testifies to Peter’s authority, an authority that he recognized and exercised, and an authority that was recognized by those present at the council. No one contested Peter’s teaching, and by it the debate was settled.

 

Secondly, it testifies to the judicial authority of the body of governing officials. They understood themselves to have the authority to impose upon Christians disciplinary precepts that were binding.

 

Thirdly, it provides the model/paradigm for settling theological controversies. For Christian communities that profess Sola Scriptura—the principle that states Scripture alone is our infallible standard for determining God’s revelation, they can’t live out this model instituted by Christ and followed by the early church.

 

So, this raises the question, “Which is more reasonable: the claim that such a paradigm changed/shifted when the last apostle died or the claim that such a paradigm continued beyond the apostolic age?” I think the latter is more reasonable. Why would Christ give us instructions to settle theological controversies with this model only for the first century? It doesn’t make sense.

 

What makes more sense is that Christ willed this living teaching authority to be part and parcel of the Church. And given that the Church is meant to last forever until the end of time, such a living teaching authority would last until the end of time, always providing God’s people a means by which they can settle theological questions that pertain to God’s revelation.

 

Okay, let’s now turn to the detail in the Gospel reading, which is taken from John 14:23-29. I’m not going to read the whole passage. Rather, I’m only going to highlight the relevant verse, verse 28, which reads, “The Father is greater than I.” How can Jesus be equal to the Father, so it’s argued, when he explicitly says the Father is greater?

 

One answer is that Jesus attributes this lesser status to himself insofar as he is man, not God. St. Thomas Aquinas explains,

 

Thus when he says, the Father is greater than I, he does not mean I, as Son of God, but as Son of man, for in this way he is not only inferior to the Father and the Holy Spirit, but even to the angels: “We see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels” (Heb. 2:9). Again, in some things he was subject to human beings, as his parents (Luke 2:51). Consequently, he is inferior to the Father because of his human nature, but equal because of his divine nature (Commentary on the Gospel of John 14.8).

 

We must remember that on the traditional Christian view, Jesus, along with being fully God, is fully man, possessing a real human nature. As such, he can attribute to himself that which properly belongs to a human being. For example, he can truthfully say of himself that he was born, he grew in wisdom and knowledge, he wept, he laughed, he ate, he drank, he suffered, he died, etc.

 

Now, it’s a truth of human nature that a person’s body and soul, along with all their powers (vegetative, sensitive, and rational), depend upon God at every moment they exist. And since whatever depends upon another for its existence is inferior to that which it depends upon, it follows that God is greater than the human nature that a person possesses.

 

Jesus has a real human body and soul. As such, at every moment his body and soul exists, along with their powers, they depend upon God for their existence. This makes Jesus’ human body and soul inferior to God the Father.

 

Therefore, because he is fully man—having a real human nature that’s dependent upon God at every moment it exists—Jesus can say that God the Father is greater than him. But inasmuch as he has the divine nature, he is equal to the Father (Phil. 2:6; John 5:8; John 1:1).

 

Aquinas gives us another way we can respond: the Father is greater than the Son “by the dignity of a grantor or source. . . a principle inasmuch as it is from the Father that the Son possesses that by which He is equal to the Father.” In other words, because of the order of relation that exists between the Father and the Son—the Son proceeds from the Father and not vice versa—Jesus can say that the Father is greater than he.

 

Conclusion

 

Well, my friends, that does it for this episode of the Sunday Catholic Word. The readings for this upcoming sixth Sunday of Easter, Year C, provide us with only a few apologetical details, but the topics that they relate to are plentiful and profound:

 

• The first century existence of the magisterium, which in turn reveals a higher rank of authority identified in a body of governing officials,
• The model for settling theological controversies—namely, appealing to the magisterium,
• The supremacy of St. Peter, who takes initiative at the council of Jerusalem to settle the debate concerning salvation, and
• The divinity of Jesus, along with the reality of his humanity.

 

As always, I want to thank you for subscribing to the podcast. And please be sure to tell your friends about it and invite them to subscribe as well through any podcast platform that they use. You can also access the archived episodes of the Sunday Catholic Word at sundaycatholicword.com.

 

You might also want to check out the other great podcasts in our Catholic Answers podcast network: Trent Horn’s The Counsel of Trent, Joe Heschmeyer’s Shameless Popery, and Jimmy Akin’s The Jimmy Akin podcast,” all of which can be found at catholic.com. And if you want to follow more of my own work, check out my website at karlobroussard.com

 

One last thing: if you’re interested in getting some cool mugs and stickers with my logo, “Mr. Sunday podcast,” go to shop.catholic.com.

 

I hope you have a blessed sixth Sunday of Easter, Year C. Until next time, God Bless.