On the Divine Institution of The Papacy

Having dispatched the treatise on the promises made by the Lord to Peter alone in Matthew, it now falls to us to treat the commission which the Savior made to Peter in John, when he said to him so many times feed my sheep. Here, as in the foregoing, four points arise to be made clear: namely, that these words are understood as spoken to the person of Peter, that they are understood as spoken to him alone in such a way that nowhere else were similar words spoken to the rest, that the feeding of the whole church was committed to Peter, and that through these words the pontificate of the catholic church was given to Peter.

Since, however, he knows not how to loose who is ignorant of the knot, the things that can render the matter doubtful must be brought forward in each of these points. From two considerations it appears, in the first place, that it was said not to the person, but to the qualified person, feed my sheep.

First, from the surname of Peter: since he was called Simon of John, that is, obedient to grace: for not in vain (as Bede says here) did the Lord so call him, but to insinuate this mystery.

Next, from the threefold question lovest thou me: where manifestly he said to the one loving him, feed my sheep. From these it appears that it was said not to the person, but to the person qualified by obedience to divine grace and by love of Christ himself, feed my sheep.

At this point it must be observed that we should not decline into extreme errors, but proceed by a middle way: for when the office of the qualified person is under discussion, four things arise, namely: the person, his quality, the use of the office, and its rectitude. All of which, although they are distinct, the heretics nevertheless, unwilling to discern between the use of the power and the rectitude of the use, attribute the whole to the quality: refusing to acknowledge as ministers of Christ those who are evil, because they are not qualified by the charity of Christ — as though power and the right use of power were the same thing, or at least as though both were committed to the quality, that is, to charity: whence, straying yet more widely, they arrogate ecclesiastical power to any just man whatsoever. The foolish, however (whose number is infinite), making little of the rectitude of the use, think they have done enough if they attribute ecclesiastical power to the person, whatever may be the case regarding the quality of charity. But the right and catholic reasoning embraces the middle way, holding that ecclesiastical power was given, and ought to be given, to the qualified person: yet in such a way that to the person corresponds the power, or the use of the power, while to the quality corresponds the rectitude of the use. For thus both errors are avoided: while it is wisely committed to the qualified person that he should rightly use the ecclesiastical ministry, and if it happens that the ministers are evil, the church is not subjected to the danger of ambiguity or deception, but receives good things even through those who are evil. And if a wise man ought to commit the right use of an office to whomever he must commit it as a qualified person, this was most especially fitting for incarnate wisdom: and therefore he thrice requires of Peter the quality of charity, committing to him the best act: so that the charity required has regard to the goodness of the act, and the very rectitude or goodness of the act is attributed to charity, as all the doctors commonly declare. Now it is clear that the best act was committed by the Savior to Peter in saying feed my sheep, from each of the three words: for to feed is to confer nourishment, by which sheep are nourished, increased, multiplied, and kept alive. He said sheep, not kids, not oxen, not wolves and men of that sort — the luxurious, the proud, the rapacious, the envious, the slanderous, and the rest. He added my, so that, self-love being withdrawn, the love of Christ might be signified as the reason for feeding the sheep. From these three joined together it becomes clear that he was committing the best act to Peter in saying feed my sheep: and because (as has been said) the best act can proceed only from the charity of Christ, therefore it was committed by the Lord to the person qualified by charity. But from this it does not follow (as the heretics pretend) that the pastoral office was committed to the quality: rather, it is understood that the goodness or rectitude of the use of the pastoral office was committed to charity; the use itself, however, is understood to have been committed to the person. Whence also the Lord, in this place, having thrice required charity, did not say, let thy charity feed my sheep: but addresses the person three times, saying, feed thou my lambs, or my sheep. And just as in Matth. the person of Peter is described by his own name and by the proper name of his carnal father as to the body, and by the grace of an inward revelation as to the soul, so that from these things singularly proper to Peter we might understand his person: so too in this place, not once but three times, the person of Peter is described, according to the flesh, by the same proper name and that of his carnal father, Simon of John or of Jonah (as the more correct manuscripts have it), and according to the soul, from his own humbling by which he submits his heart to the knowledge of Christ, thrice repeating Lord, thou knowest that I love thee: and from his own being grieved, Peter was grieved, and the rest. So that from these things proper to himself we might openly understand the person of Peter to be the one to whom Christ said feed my sheep: and accordingly we might perceive that the pastoral office was committed not to the gift of charity but to the person: while from the charity required we might understand that the rectitude of the use of the pastoral office is committed to charity: for no one without charity can rightly use the pastoral office. And these things are according to the literal sense of the Gospel: but to the mystical sense (from which an efficacious argument cannot be drawn) it belongs that Simon of John is interpreted as obedient to grace.

Rejection of the objections. Whence it is clear that Christ said feed my sheep not to the quality but to the person of Peter as qualified by charity: and accordingly, if Peter had fallen from charity, he would not have lost the pastoral office, but the right use of it: since it is not the office but the rectitude of the use that depends on charity — as is plain to every catholic doctor, and has as its contradictors only the heretics.