Customer Reviews

Papal Primacy (Theology)

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I strongly recommend Klaus Schatz "Papal Primacy" for any who want balanced overview of the history of primacy in the papacy. While maintaining the validity of Catholicism's current perception of the papacy, Schatz attempts to mark out the road that lead to this understanding with honesty and impartiality towards its adversaries. Of additional value are the extensive footnotes Schatz uses to document his account. These are useful in their own right for any interested in doing further research into the foundational primary and secondary texts.

Briefly, he organizes the primacy history around the theme of a central concept of raw and largely undefined initial primacy that then goes through subsequent historical interpretations, including the conversion of aristocratic Rome, the Germanic migration into Europe, Feudalism, the rise of absolute monarchism, and then the enlightenment and modernity, each with its own perception of what that primacy meant. Through this churning kaleidoscope of historical context, he records the contests the papacy had for supremacy in the Church with the Roman empire, other episcopal sees in both the East and West, Western European kingdoms and conciliarism, with the culmination of its victory over these various forces in Vatican I.

Vatican II is viewed very much as a work in progress, and with its integration with Vatican I still in doubt, Klaus ends with a note of caution that its efforts to rebalance Catholic ecclesiology with greater collegiality and a communio based ecclesiology are in danger of being perceived in opposition to Vatican I with a renewal the sorts of contests that ultimately rejected Gallicanism in favor of Ultramontanism.

This is a very worthwhile book, and does much to explain the development of papal primacy over the centuries. Schatz is well-balanced; he doesn't flinch from episodes in history that call into question this doctrine, nor does he hesitate to show where it was clearly exercised in the past.

Some who are orthodox Catholics may object to this book, as it admits that papal primacy has developed, and is not practiced today exactly like it was practiced in the early Church. But Schatz is simply relating the true story, in all it's fullness. I consider myself a faithful and orthodox Catholic, and I think this book should be required reading for anyone - Catholic or non-Catholic - who wishes to understand this often-misunderstood doctrine.

Schatz brings a refreshing work of outstanding historical scholarship and theological analysis on the development of the primacy, unlike his North American counterparts. He assumes a Catholic readership and a basic background of patristics and church history. He avoids the common historical pitfalls that are typical of current polemical discussions, where even Catholic apologists sometimes hastily introduce modern concepts into the early developments of the Church. Rather, he asks how the standards for Church unity were established and what the significance of the Roman church was in that context?

If you want a history of the development of the papacy into what it is today, you can't do much better than "Papal Primacy" by Klaus Schatz. The author says in just under 200 pages what it would take a lesser writer more than 500.

The origins of papal primacy, as everyone knows it today, lay in the prestige given to the church of Rome in the early church. It was the seat of the Empire and was where Peter and Paul were martyred. Irenaeus in the 2nd century, writing against the Gnostics' claims to secret traditions, appealed to the public traditions of the Episcoplal office, specifically apostolic succession, and lists Rome as a prime example. Beginning in the second half of the fourth century there was a remarkable development of the concept of primacy, especially under Popes Damasus (366-384), Siricius (384-399), Innocent I (402-417), and above all Leo I, the Great (440-461), the initial high point of the papacy in Christian antiquity. The title `pope' itself first appears in the fourth century, initially for a number of individual bishops including the bishop of Alexandria; it has been reserved for the bishop of Rome since the fifth century. This development was characterized in the first place by the concentration of the general complex of ideas surrounding the Roman church, based on the special reverence reserved for Peter and Paul, and now extended along one specific line, namely the Petrine succession of the Roman bishops. This first appeared in the mid-third century with Stephen, but now it became the central and directing idea in the concept of primacy. In the pope, Peter himself is present; indeed Peter lives on in him. Leo I's conception of papal primacy revolved around two central ideas: the pope is both the `heir of Peter' within the meaning of Roman law, and therefore the possessor of his power of the keys, and he is Peter's `vicar' or `representative' as Peter is vicar of Christ. The title `vicar of Peter' would over the course of the centuries become the core of papal self-understanding. However, well into the second Christian millennium Roman tradition established the significance of Rome by reference to both the `leaders,' Peter and Paul, the Christian counterparts of Romulus and Remus." (p. 28-29)

The title "Vicar of Christ" did not appear until the 12th century. With the collapse of the feudal order and the rise of cities in the 12th can 13th centuries, things changed. "People growing up in cities were no longer confined within the narrow horizon of an earldom and the acquaintances of their closest neighbors...The papacy was better able than bishops or other specialized Church institutions to deal with this mobile and differentiated world, which required a leadership and supervision that only Rome could offer." (p. 82-83)

The Avignon papacy was another decisive period. With 2 popes excommunicating each other in the 14th century, and a conciliar movement demanding more power for councils, the papacy was in trouble. But it survived in 2 ways. First, it began reserving to itself the appointment of bishops, primarily for financial reasons (bishops appointed by the curia had to give much of their first-year income to the curia). Second, it was able to circumvent the conciliar movement by supporting absolute monarchies; although monarchs often challenged the papacy, the new state church model within monarchies allowed the monarchs to nominate the bishops, and for the pope to confirm them. This effectively meant the end for any kind of organized international conciliar movement.

The importance of the Reformation cannot be overestimated. With Protestants attacking the Roman Catholic distinctives such as purgatory, the mass, transubstantiation, etc., it was important to maintain belief in a strong papacy as a sign of confessional identity in the Counter-Reformation period. Curiously, the Council of Trent never defined any kind of papal primacy, probably because conciliarist thought was still strong in France and Germany.

The final step toward the papacy as we know it today came in the 19th century, when political revolutions in Europe spelled the end the state church model. There was no longer any check on the influence of the papacy in individual countries, and the stage was set for what we see today.

There's so much more in this book that I could have discussed, such as his chronicling of Leo I, Charlemagne, Vatican I, etc., but then the review would have never ended. Schatz is able to summarize hundreds of history books in under 200 pages. "Papal Primacy" will be valuable first of all to church history buffs, as it is a great resource, and second of all who would view current pronouncements from the Vatican and its apologists with skepticism. The claim that the current church structure is divinely ordained, as this excellent book shows, is not born out by history.

As other reviewers have noted, this is a balanced and non-polemical history of papal primacy from a Catholic viewpoint. The author considers the Vatican I definitions of papal primacy to be historically justified. What he does in this book is show how the concept of papal primacy developed historically in order to reach this point. In doing so, he corrects numerous misunderstandings of papal primacy, by both Catholics and non-Catholics. Critics of the Vatican I definitions should read and understand this book before launching further polemics.

I highly recommend Orthodox theologian Oliver Clement's book _You are Peter_ as a companion text. If you can only afford one book, I recommend Schatz's book. The wealth of historical information and analysis he offers is not duplicated elsewhere. But Clement's book is also a valuable contribution to this discussion, and arrives at remarkably similar conclusions from the Eastern Orthodox perspective.

A helpful bonus is an appendix containing excerpts from the following primary sources: Irenaeus, Canons of Sardica, Gregory VII, the four Gallican articles, and the relevant texts from the Councils of Constance, Florence, Vatican I, and Vatican II.

This is a fabulous book for both Catholics and Eastern Orthodox who want to understand how the Papacy became what it is today. Unlike other books that surround a sampling of events with persuasive rhetoric, Schatz dips into vast knowledge and guides the reader chronologically through the mindset of the Early Church. His account is balanced and relatively unbiased, touching on a number of historical perspectives and their relative supportability. The construction of this book is scholarship at its finest and I believe anyone would benefit from it.

Schatz does assume quite a bit of knowledge of key figures and controversies of the Early Church. Without a decent familiarity the reading may be slow going. Keep wikipedia at your fingertips if this is the case.