Divine Order and Truth within Christ’s Church

Christ didn’t leave us with a book and 40,000 opinions. He left us with a Church, a priesthood, and a Kingdom that is governed by continuity.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and are not necessarily in agreement or contradiction with those of The American Postliberal.

In the Old Testament, God established not merely a spiritual relationship with His people, but a visible kingdom, the Kingdom of Israel, with a structured and sacred hierarchy. This wasn’t human-invented or political in the worldly sense. It was divinely instituted: a covenantal kingdom that had a high priest (Aaron and his successors), Levitical priests, prophets, and a Davidic king entrusted with ruling God’s people. And when that king was absent or died, he appointed a steward; one with the authority to “open and shut,” acting on his behalf.

This is made explicit in Isaiah 22:20–22:

On that day I will summon my servant Eliakim, son of Hilkiah; I will clothe him with your robe, gird him with your sash, and give over to him your authority. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. I will place the key of the house of David on his shoulder; when he opens, no one shall shut, when he shuts, no one shall open.

This steward, given the key of David, did not replace the king, he governed in the king’s name, ensuring order and unity from within. Now fast forward to the New Testament, where Christ fulfills this Old Testament kingdom by establishing a new and greater kingdom: the Catholic Church. Jesus does not leave his Church in confusion. He uses the same divine pattern from the Old Covenant: a high authority (Peter, the Bishop of Rome today), fellow leaders (the Apostles, called Bishops today), a priesthood (presbyters and deacons), and a people (the laity) — all integrated into one visible, ordered body.

In Matthew 16:18–19, Christ uses the same Davidic language from Isaiah:

And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.

The only other time “keys” are used symbolically in Scripture is in Isaiah 22 when Jesus, in giving Peter the keys, is appointing him as the royal steward over his kingdom on earth, just as Eliakim was appointed over David’s.

This kingdom is not a symbol; it is visible, structured, and holy, just like the Old Testament kingdom of God. In Luke 22:29–32, Jesus further reinforces the Apostles' governance role:

And I confer a kingdom on you, just as my Father has conferred one on me, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom; and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Simon, Simon, behold Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat, but I have prayed that your own faith may not fail; and once you have turned back, you must strengthen your brothers.

Christ prays specifically for Peter, not just as an individual, but as the one entrusted to “strengthen” the brethren; just as a chief steward or prime minister preserves the integrity of the kingdom. Then in John 21:15–17, the risen Jesus explicitly recommissions Peter:

Jesus said to Simon Peter, ‘Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?’ He said to him, ‘Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.’ He said to him, ‘Feed my lambs.’
He then said to him a second time, ‘Simon, son of John, do you love me?’ He said to him, ‘Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.’ He said to him, ‘Tend my sheep.’
He said to him the third time, ‘Simon, son of John, do you love me?’ Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, ‘Do you love me?’ and he said to him, ‘Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Feed my sheep.’

Christ, the true King, is entrusting his flock to a visible shepherd. Peter is charged with pastoral and governing authority over the Church, not because he is greater than Christ, but because Christ wills Peter to govern visibly through his chosen instruments; just as Christ willed the same with Moses, the judges, David, and the high priests.

This is why the Church is called in 1 Timothy 3:15:

the Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.

Not scripture alone nor personal inspiration, but the Church, structured and apostolic, that Christ Himself established.

The Catholic Church is not just like the Kingdom of Israel solely by virtue of being its fulfillment; God does not change his ways. He has always worked through visible, hierarchical, and covenantal institutions to sanctify, teach, and govern his people. From Eden’s garden temple to Mount Sinai, to David’s throne, to the present day on the Church’s altar — God governs his people with order.

As Hebrews 13:17 reminds the faithful,

Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow, for that would be of no advantage to you,

and as James 5:14–15 affirms,

Is anyone among you sick? He should summon the presbyters of the Church, and they should pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the prayer of faith will save the sick person, and the Lord will raise him up,

this apostolic hierarchy and visible kingdom is the divine model Christ gave us. The steward is not optional. Without him, as the divided tribes of Israel proved, the house begins to splinter.

Christ is King, the eternal King, who has been enthroned in heaven. But he did not abandon his people in disarray. As in the case of David’s kingdom, when the King left the house of Israel the kingdom was not without a head. Christ willed that his visible earthly kingdom, ruled by the vicars of the apostles, should be maintained on earth by the apostles and their successors, who are the shepherds of the Church.

The pope does not succeed Christ as a monarch, but rather as his vicar, his representative, and as the visible head of the Mystical Body of Christ with a mission to maintain the unity of the Mystical Body and to safeguard the deposit of faith. The Catholic hierarchy is a continuation of the sacred order of the Old Covenant.

Just as there were high priests and Levites to mediate the blessings of God’s covenant, so now there are bishops, priests, and deacons to sacramentally dispense the grace of Christ’s new covenant. This hierarchy is not the creation of man, but the divine continuation of the means by which God has always governed his people.

Nowhere is the rejection of Christ’s divinely instituted Church more visible than in Protestantism — the most divided branch of Christianity. With over 27,000 denominations, movements, and non-denominational offshoots, all claiming to teach the truth while contradicting one another, Protestantism demonstrates what happens when the Church is severed from apostolic authority.

Even among those who claim to be “Reformed only,” their very identity stems from protest rejecting the Catholic Church’s authority. By definition, if you protest the Church Christ established and reject her visible structure, you are Protestant. This fragmentation directly violates Scripture itself, which warns, “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation” (2 Peter 1:20). The foundation of Protestantism is precisely that: private, individual interpretation, divorced from the authority of the apostles and their successors.

Even the most sincere Christians are left to navigate thousands of conflicting doctrines on baptism, salvation, the Eucharist, moral theology, and Church governance. A Reformed Baptist church in Arkansas or a popular megachurch in Dallas, however well-intentioned, cannot be the Church founded by Christ if they lack apostolic succession, valid sacraments, and the authority of the keys Christ gave to his Church (cf. Matthew 18:18; John 20:21–23). The Bible was never meant to replace the Church, it was written, safeguarded, and canonized by her, and only within her living tradition and authority can it be rightly understood.

This divine structure has preserved doctrinal unity and sacramental coherence for over 2,000 years, but when this structure is rejected, unity begins to unravel. This is tragically evident in Eastern Orthodoxy — which severed itself from communion with the steward in 1054.

Before the schism, bishops and patriarchs consistently looked to Rome for clarification and confirmation: at the Council of Chalcedon in 451, the bishops famously cried, “Peter has spoken through Leo,” after Pope Leo the Great’s tome was read and affirmed. Even earlier, Pope Victor I (late 2nd century) attempted to resolve the Quartodeciman controversy over the date of Easter; asserting his universal authority over Eastern churches. Notably, he was not denied due to authority, but only resisted because of traditional customs.

After the break, however, Eastern churches, though apostolic in origin, lacked a final earthly authority. Over time, their unity began to fall.

Most recently in 2016, the “Great and Holy Council” in Crete, intended as a pan-Orthodox gathering, was flawed by division. Major churches such as the Patriarchates of Antioch, Russia (before the formal schism), Bulgaria, and Georgia boycotted it due to jurisdictional and theological disputes.

The root issue wasn’t the logistics, it was the absence of a recognized, divinely instituted authority to settle disagreements. Constantinople claims a primacy of honor but no power to bind. As a result, unresolved tensions, like the Antioch–Constantinople schism over Qatar, continue to divide Orthodoxy.

Without Peter, every bishop becomes his own pope, and doctrinal disputes have no final court of appeal. The visible unity Christ prayed for (John 17:21) can’t exist in a system where each local synod is supreme. The Catholic Church, by contrast, has faced heresies, scandals, and schisms, but always with one shepherd to call the Church back into unity.

This divine structure has maintained unity through a recognized and divinely instituted hierarchy. Even before the ‘Great’ Schism of 1054, the Eastern bishops understood and accepted this. For instance, the Council of Serdica (343–344) was convened by Eastern and Western bishops to settle disputes, but its canons—especially those granting appeals to the Bishop of Rome—were only later accepted because Pope Julius I approved them.

Similarly, the Second Council of Ephesus (449), also known as the “Robber Council,” was declared invalid by Pope Leo I, and, despite it being held in the East, the Eastern bishops eventually submitted to Rome’s judgment accepting the authority of the Council of Chalcedon instead, which Pope Leo ratified.

These events prove that even the Eastern churches recognized the pope’s authority to ratify or reject councils; he wasn’t only the Western Patriarch with honorary status, but also the arbiter of orthodoxy.

That recognition disappears after the schism, and with it, the ability to resolve disputes definitively. The fragmented aftermath—visible still today in the breakdown of pan-Orthodox councils like the 2016 “Great and Holy Council”—shows what happens when the steward is rejected. Without Peter, no one holds the keys.

This structure isn’t man-made, it’s God’s pattern from the beginning. Christ didn’t leave us with a book and 40,000 opinions. He left us with a Church, a priesthood, and a Kingdom that is governed by continuity.

So when someone says, “I just follow Jesus,” ask, “Which Jesus?” The one interpreted by your local pastor, or the one preached and safeguarded for 2,000 years by the Church he himself founded?

This is a valid challenge because “just following Jesus” without the Church he founded risks following a version shaped by personal opinion, not apostolic truth.

---

I am grateful for Fr. Herman and Fr. Valentin who have been close mentors and teachers of mine, but also for Fr. Louis Bouyer, whose vast theological writings highlight the liturgical and hierarchical character of the Church as desired by Christ, his teaching concurs with the voice of the early Fathers—St. Ignatius of Antioch, who said, “Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 8); St. Irenaeus of Lyons, who affirmed the necessity of apostolic succession for safeguarding true doctrine (Against Heresies, 3.3.1); and St. Cyprian of Carthage, who declared, “He cannot have God for his Father who has not the Church for his mother” (On the Unity of the Church, 6).

---

If you enjoyed this article, please consider becoming a patron of our publication! Your enthusiasm and support means a lot to all of us at The American Postliberal — and we promise we’ll work hard for your investment in our project.