KEYS, POWER OF THE.
I. Biblical Sources of the Doctrine. II. The Patristic Period.
Sub-Apostolic Views (§1).
Extension of the Power (§ 2).
Origen, Cyprian, and Augustine (§3).
Sins Controlled by the Power (§ 4).
Treatment of the Lapsed and Penitent (§ 5).
The Power and the Priesthood (§ 6).
III. The Middle Ages and the Roman
Catholic Doctrine. Penance (§1). The Priest as Judge or as Mediator
(§2). Combination of the Two Views
(§3). The Twofold Key and Thomas
Aquinas (§ 4). The Tridentine Decree (§ 5).
I. Biblical Sources of the Doctrine: The " power of the keys " is a symbolical term which in its more extended sense denotes the whole range of the power of the Church, while in its restricted usage it connotes simply the power of granting or refusing absolution. The concept goes back to Christ's words to Peter (Matt. xvi. 19), "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven." This is doubtless based on " the key of the house of David " mentioned in Isa. xxii. 22,
The Problem of Priestly Fallibility (§6).
The Keys in the Greek Church (§ 7). IV. The Reformation and the Protestant Doctrine.
Luther and Melanchthon (§ 1).
The Calvinistic Theory (§ 2).
Lutheran Attacks on the Doctrine (§3).
Theological Aspect of the Doctrine (§4).
and quoted in Rev. iii. 7, and implies that the steward of the house received the keys so that no one might open the door he had shut, or shut the door he had opened. This metaphor is not carried through in Matt. xvi. 19, but passages like Matt, xxiii. 13 and Luke xi. 52 prove that " binding and loosing " must have been related to the concept of admission and exclusion. In Matt, xviii. 18, where the power of binding and loosing is conferred upon all disciples as the representatives of the Church,
Keys, Power of the
THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
the connection of the passage leaves no doubt that it refers to the exclusion of sinners from or the admission of penitents to the congregation. Nor can the similar words in Matt. xvi. 19 have an essentially different meaning, so that the concept of the early Church, which is shared by the Greek exegetes, can not be wrong in interpreting the passage by John xx. 23. It is especially to be emphasized that in both passages the disciples receive no commission of a new function, but are merely assured that the exercise of their former function is valid before God. It is still more desirable to interpret the passage in Matthew from the whole connection of the .Synoptic Gospels, and it thus becomes plain that in consideration of such passages as Matt. xxiii. 8-10 we can not ascribe any legislative power to the disciples. The sense of the " power of the keys " seems to be, therefore, that Jesus gave Peter, or his disciples, or the body of Christian believers, authority to receive into the kingdom of heaven by forgiveness of sins or to exclude from it by refusal of pardon, thus forgiving sin (especially on earth) in the name of God and with efficacy with God in the same way as the Son of Man had hitherto exercised it (cf. Matt. ix. 6).
II. The Patristic Period: In the patristic period the " power of the keys " was held to connote strictly the remission (or retention) of sins, and not legal enactments. This is clear from Tertullian (Scorpiace, x.; De pudicitia, xxi.), from the letter of the churches at Lyons and Vienne (Eusebius, Hist, eccl., V., ii. 5), from Cyprian (Epist., lxxiii. 7, lxxv. 16), and from other sources (Ambrose, De pcenitentia, i. 2; Augustine, Contra adversarium legis et prophetarum, 136; Faustus of Riez, Sermo vi.; Leo the Great, Sermo xlix. 3; Apostolic Constitutions, ii. 11 sqq.). It would be erroneous to suppose that this was a i. Sub- narrowing of the concept. The de-
Apostolic velopment was rather in the opposite Views. direction, for when the " power of the keys" came to be interpreted as a judicial act, especially in relation to the lapsed, the furtherance of the juristic aspect of the concept was easy. Thus the pseudo-Clementine Homilies (iii. 72; cf. Clement, Epist. ad Jacobum, 2) see in the " power to bind and loose " the functions of the episcopal office.
While in the primitive Church the " power of the keys " may be regarded, roughly speaking, as ascribed to the Church, or to its officials, or to those endowed with the Spirit, in the sense that all three concurred, nevertheless the official element gradually superseded the other two. In this early period the " power of the keys " was indubitably possessed by the Church as a whole (cf. Tertullian, Scorpiace, 10; Cyprian, Epist., lxxv. 16), the Church consisting of the bishops, the clergy, and the body of the faithful (Cyprian (Epist., xxxiii. 1). Cyprian is the first to permit to the clergy what he ascribes to the Church, since " the Church is founded upon the bishops, and every act of the Church is controlled by these same rulers " (Epist., xxxiii. 1), although he still maintains that " remission of sins can not be given by those who, it is certain, have not the Holy .Spirit " (Epist., Ixix. 11). Elsewhere
the idea is found (cf. Eusebius, Hist, eccl., V. xviii. 7; Cyprian, Epist., xviii. 1, xix. 2, xxxiii. 2; De lapsis, 19) that apostles and prophets, as well as martyrs, have the right to forgive sins as possessing the Holy Ghost. It is not clear, however that
they exercised this function without
2. Exten- the cooperation of the other agents al-
sion of the ready mentioned, nor does Cyprian
Power, grant the martyrs more than interces-
sionary powers, the remission itself being granted by the priest (De lapsis, 16, 29; Epist. lv. 24) who is "judge in the place of Christ " (Epist. lix. 7). But these three classes were never held to be the sole decisive possessors of the " power of the keys," and Montanistic expressions contain indubitable innovations. Thus Tertullian mentions " God's dear ones " (De pcenitentia, 9) as those to whom the lapsed should kneel next after the presbyters. When, however, he grants the " power of the keys "to the " spiritual," whether prophets or apostles (De pudicitia, 21), he includes the Church, instead of excluding it, opposing only a priesthood in which he fails to find this spiritual characteristic.
Alexandrine theology seems to have made little change. Origen, while energetically vindicating the " power of the keys " to Christians of true spiritual insight, presupposes, in the case of grievous faults, the participation of priests or bishops in the forgiveness of sins (Deoratione, 28; Commentary on Matthew, xii. 14), thus restricting to them such a spiritual character. It is evident, moreover, that the " power of the keys " was held to be vested in the bishop (cf. Tertullian, De baptismate, 17; Apostolic Constitutions, ii. 11); but there is no evidence in Cyprian to show that Peter, to say nothing of his successors at Rome, had any prerogative of this
power over other apostles or bishops
3. Origen, (Epist., lxxv. 16), his view being that
Cyprian Christ gave this privilege first to Peter,
and and then to his fellow apostles (Epist.,
Augustine, lix. 19; De unitate, 4). So according
to Augustine, the keys were given to the Church, represented by Peter (Epist., cxlix. 7, ccxcv. 2). The Church is administered by the bishops (Sermo cccli. 9), but it is the Holy Ghost which remits sins both " above man " and " through man " (Sermo xcix. 9). The bishops of Rome, however, laid special claims at an early date to the " power of the keys " in virtue of their succession to Peter (cf. Tertullian, De pudicitia, 1, 21; Cyprian, Epist., lxxv. 17); while Leo the Great (on Matt. xvi. 19), maintaining the "privilege of Peter," held that the " power of the keys " was extended to the other apostles and to all the heads of the Church; and Optatus (De schismate Donati, vii. 3) believed that Peter received this prerogative that he might communicate it to the other apostles.
The " power of the keys " was used by the Church especially in the administration of baptism, and also in penance for grievous sins committed after baptism, more venial faults being atoned for by the daily penitence of the faithful heart, the fifth petition of the Lord's Prayer, fasting, the oblations, and the Eucharist. Although the list of grievous