Even if Catholics sustain the case that Peter was the leader of the apostles, they still have some work to do. They need to establish that the office of apostle was created to be passed down in perpetuity. Therefore current holders of the “chair of Peter” have the same authority as Peter himself.
Catholics offer a couple points in defense of apostolic succession. The first is that in Acts 1:12-26 the first believers appointed Matthias as successor for Judas. The second point is that apostle is often referred to as an office. If apostle is an office rather than a person, then the office must still exist after the apostle dies.
There are many objections to the Catholic interpretation, beginning with the fact that the Bible makes it very clear that Acts 1 is not a precedent.
Acts 1 is not a Precedent
Acts 1 is the most important Catholic proof text for apostolic succession. It seems to support their case very well. Judas died after betraying Jesus, so Matthias was chosen to take Judas’ place. The problem with the Catholic position is that it is very clear that Acts 1 is not a precedent. From Acts 1:18-22
18(With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
20″For,” said Peter, “it is written in the book of Psalms,
” ‘May his place be deserted;
let there be no one to dwell in it,’ and,
” ‘May another take his place of leadership.’21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”
A successor was appointed to Judas only because of this particular prophecy. This clearly does not apply to any other apostle, and the rest of the Bible bears this out. The procedure used in Acts 1 was never repeated. The real lesson of Acts 1 cripples the case for Catholicism: there is no such thing as a “chair of Peter.”
Apostolic Succession Means Creating New Apostles
Just because there is no “chair of Peter” does not mean that there is no apostolic succession. Instead it simply means that new apostles were appointed by existing apostles. They did not occupy the “chair” of a previous apostle, instead the position was created for them. That is how Paul appointed apostles such as Silas and Timothy. Here is a full listing of the apostles in the Bible:
- The Seventy that Jesus sent out (Luke 10:1, 3)
- Matthias, the successor to Judas (Acts 1:26)
- James, the Lord’s brother (Galatians 1:19)
- Paul (Acts 14:14)
- Barnabas (Acts 14:4, 14; 1 Corinthians 9:5 & 6)
- Apollos (1 Corinthians 4:6-9)
- Andronicus (Romans 16:7)
- Junia (Romans 16:7)
- Epaphroditus (Phil. 2:25, {messenger is apostle in the Greek}
- Titus (2 Corinthians 8:23 {also messenger)
- Unamed brother with Titus (2 Cor. 8:18, 23)
- Timothy (1 Thess. 1:1 and follow with 2:6)
- Silas/Silvanus (1 Thess.1:1 to get the “we” writing the letter, and follow with 2:6)
Some of these can perhaps be disputed. Perhaps Romans 16:7 means that Junia was merely highly regarded by people who were apostles. But it cannot be disputed that there are many apostles other than the original Twelve (and Paul).
Clear Cut Losses of Apostolic Authority
The first generation of apostles were granted an authority by Jesus and Holy Spirit that no one has today. They were divinely inspired to create books of the Bible. They could heal the sick, cast our evil spirits, and raise the dead. But no apostle today can do those things. So even Catholics would have to concede that the Holy Spirit has withdrawn at least some support from the apostles over time.
The Protestant position on apostolic succession is this: apostles were needed to evangelize and settle matters of doctrine for the early Church. But that was only their short term calling. The Holy Spirit called them to write the books of the New Testament. When those books were written apostles were unneeded and apostolic succession ended.. There is a reason why this period of history is sometimes called the Apostolic Era. This period has been largely lost to history, so now Catholics claim that apostolic succession continued unbroken, and it continues to this present day.
