OceanSide church of Christ

 Previous Return to Articles Next 

APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION

Victor M. Eskew

 

            In the Parable of the Sower, Jesus explained “the seed” mentioned in the parable to His disciples.  In Luke 8:11, we read:  “”Now the parable is this:  The seed is the word of God.”  This is a vital teaching that needs to be understood by all.  There are many lessons that can be drawn from the concept that God’s Word is seed.  Seed is powerful.  Seed has to be planted in soil order to bring forth fruit.  Seed has to have time to germinate at times in order to bring forth fruit.  Seed produces after its own kind.  And, as long as there is seed, a crop, in this case the kingdom of God, is always in existence, at least in seed form. 

            The Catholic Church does not rely on the seed of the Word to prove its so-called “divine origin.”  The Catholic Church relies on something it refers to as “Apostolic Succession” in an attempt to prove she is the original church.  In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the teaching is described as follows:  “The whole church is apostolic, in that she remains, through the successors of St. Peter and the other apostles, in communion of faith and life with her origin…” (p. 249).  On page 30, they explain this doctrine in more detail.  “Indeed, the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time.”  In essence, the Catholic Church is supposed to be able to reveal a line of succession from the present back to each and every apostle.  The only one that seems to be of great interest involves the line back to Simon Peter.  This line is referred to as the “unbroken list of popes from Peter to today.”  This list is also called “the Title Deed of the Roman Catholic Church.”

            The doctrine of Apostolic Succession is a false doctrine.  There are numerous arguments that can be made against the doctrine.  First, there is no succession of popes that is found in the New Testament.  Tradition reveals that Peter died in the middle of the first century.  There is not one passage of Scripture that even hints at his successor.  If Peter were truly the pope of the church, there should have been a record of his death.  In addition, there should have been a divine record of his successor.  However, there is no one found in the Scriptures who is named as a “replacement” for “Pope Peter.”  The Catholics claim that Linus replaced Peter.  This comes to us from Irenaeus who wrote about it in 180 A.D.  Linus is mentioned in II Timothy 4:21, but, again, the reference is not announcing that he is Peter’s successor.  Another interesting point is that Linus died in 76 A.D.  This means that another had to follow him.  The Bible is also dead silent about the “third pope.”  Think about what we have studied.  Peter is said to have been the first pope.  There is supposed to be a line of popes that can be traced that follow him.  He died in the first century, but no New Testament writer mentions his successor.  Let us say that one more time.  No New Testament writer mentions his successor.

            Another argument against Apostolic Succession is that the Catholics do not have a clean list from Peter to the present pope.  According to some Roman Catholic sources, Linus was not the second pope.  A man name Clement was.  Others, however, put Clement as the fourth pope of the church.  When you study Apostolic Succession, you find that there are numerous Catholic works that give a list of the popes.  These lists often differ in both order and number.  Why?  Why is this the case if there is a clear succession back to the “first pope”? 

            Another point that destroys Apostolic Succession involves the dropping of names from the list of popes.  In 1947, the Catholic Church dropped six names from the list of popes.  Articles about this appeared on the front page of the Philadelphia Inquirer and the New York Times.  If the list of popes is a perfect list back to Peter, why were six names removed?  In 973, Pope Donus was put on the list.  He was one of those removed in 1947 because it was discovered that he never existed. 

            Apostolic succession is a man-made doctrine.  It is a human attempt to trace the origins of the Catholic Church back to the first century.  The lists that have been compiled are fraudulent.  Too, the lists do not correspond with one another.  Apostolic Succession is really an argument against Catholicism’s claim to be the original church.

            Let’s now return to our introduction.  Jesus teaches us that the “seed” of the kingdom is God’s Word.  We do not need a line of people from the apostles to the present to prove we are the true church.  We only need to prove that we are teaching the same truth today the apostles were teaching.  Or, another way of saying it is, we only need to prove that we are sowing the same seed the apostles were sowing.  If the seed that is sow today is the same seed, then we are going to harvest the same crop they harvested.  They harvested Christians, disciples of Jesus Christ.   This is all we are harvesting as well. 

            Here is another way of looking at this subject.  There is not a clear line of papal succession back to Peter because Peter was never the pope.  We have proved this in previous articles.  Therefore, the providence of God did not have to provide such a list.  All of the lists are completely fabricated by men.  Their feeble attempts to come up with a “clean” list have fallen short every time.  Remember, too, that they do no need just one list back to Peter.  They need twelve more lists back to every apostle, including Paul, the apostle “born out of due time” (1 Cor. 15:8).