It is not something that modern Lutherans or Protestants spend a lot of time thinking about, but then you only get a new one every decade or so.  In my lifetime there have been 5 popes: Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis. And John Paul I barely counts. And the reality is that as the leader of roughly 1.5 Billion Roman Catholics what any Pope says or does has an impact on the church as a whole.  There is an old saying often applied, “if Rome catches a cold, Wittenberg sneezes.”  There is a list of doctrines that the church has always taught, that many protestant branches have changed with the spirit of the age, but if Rome were to change them, the worldly politics would be rough for any church continuing to confess them. That might explain some of the anxiety of the Francis years because that occasionally looked like a possibility. As a Lutheran it is easy to say “popes and councils may err.” (Luther wrote a treatise under that title.) But to a believer in Papal infallibility, that 2000 years of Popes could teach one thing in faith and morals and you could wake up the next day with the living Pope teaching something else; it went right to the heart of what they confessed.

So, as over the next week, weeks(?), months(??) that we see a new Pope elected, I thought it might be worthwhile to review what we Lutherans believe, teach and confess about that office. Maybe surprisingly the Augsburg Confession – the 1530 primary confession of the Lutheran Church – is rather silent on the bishop of Rome.  Everyone, maybe Luther excluded, still hoped for a church council at that time to adjudicate all the issues. And it was only Luther himself who was excommunicated and declared an outlaw. The Augsburg Confession later section restricts itself to commenting on practices it believes need to be universally reformed: Marriage of Priests, The Mass, Confession, Monastic Vows along with some others. It also closes with an article on Church Authority (Art 28). Maybe foreshadowing the fuller teaching, it limits itself to speaking about “the power of bishops.” The pope by implication being merely the Bishop of Rome and not a universal Bishop. The authority of all bishops is simply “that which they have according to the gospel.  For they have been given the ministry of Word and Sacrament (paragraph 20-21).”  “If they have any other authority or jurisdiction…they have this by human right. (paragraph 29).”

In 1537, what was implied in the Augsburg Confession, is made explicit in two works: The treatise titled The Power and Primacy of the Pope and Article III.4 of the Smalcald Articles entitled The Papacy.  Both are rather short and clear.  You can read any of the Confessional articles yourself at https://bookofconcord.org/ or ask me for a copy of them, we have some extras. The treatise puts forward three claims of the papacy, which the modern papacy would still hold. 1. The Pope is by divine right supreme over all bishops. 2. That by divine right the pope operates in both the Kingdom of the Right (the gospel) and The Kingdom of the Left (the Civil Realm) with the authority to appoint and remove rulers. 3. That the pope is “The Vicar of Christ” which means simply that he is in the person of Christ in all that he does. Now the modern Roman church may moderate on these occasionally due to practicality, but just like indulgences, they are still there.  The treatises teaching can be boiled down to the assertion that all of these are usurping the throne of Christ. It is Christ that is the head of the church. It is Christ who appoints both church and state rulers through various means.  And Christ needs no vicar as he is present wherever the church gathers.  The treatise holds out a distinction that none of these claims are proper by divine right.  The pope cannot bind consciences over his actions in these areas. But, by human right and custom, one can certainly consult the bishop of Rome. Philip Melanchthon the writer was still hopeful of a council healing the schism.

Luther in the same year wrote his article on the Papacy which is more strident, although it really addresses the same three claims.  It opens, “The Pope is not, according to divine law or God’s Word, the head of all Christendom.  This name belongs to One only, whose name is Jesus Christ.  The pope is only the bishop and pastor of the Church at Rome and of those who have attached themselves to him voluntarily or through a human agency.  Christians are not under him as a lord. They are with him as brethren.” Luther continues to imagine a “by human right” papacy, but concludes that this would have to be a failure. And in his toughest statement asserts, “This teaching shows forcefully that the pope is the true Antichrist. He has exalted himself above and opposed himself against Christ.  For he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power (paragraphs 9-10).”  That “saved” is the confession that our sins are forgiven by faith alone.  The absolution does not require the pope’s penance.  If we believe Christ, our sins have already been forgiven and not even the pope can stand in the way.  To the extent the pope stands in the way of the absolution, he opposes Christ.

But there are roughly 1.5 Billion Roman Catholics, fellow Christians.  In the words of the confessions they have “attached themselves to him voluntarily or through a human agency.” And it is only good and right that we should pray for them at such a time.  Both that a good and faithful man might be elevated to such an office, and that he would not get in the way of the proclamation of the gospel, but that he would be their brother in the faith.