Confusion over Is 22 and the keys


doesn’t the end of the story with Shebna say that the post that was attached firmly will come down? Doesn’t that mean that the succession of the office is over? Also, God is the one who did the appointing b/c the person in place was not living and governing in a godly way. It wasn’t just a voted on succession of office. Yet no RC could remove the pope, no matter how ungodly he may be. I realize that there aren’t many, but there have been some. So the comparison falls a bit short.

Any apologists want to give me a hand in my confusion? Thanks in advance.

:slight_smile: oneseeker


Here are a few New Testament verses that address your questions. See more at

Luke 10:16 - Jesus tells His apostles, “he who hears you, hears Me.” When we hear the bishops’ teaching on the faith, we hear Christ Himself.

Luke 22:29 - the Father gives the kingdom to the Son, and the Son gives the kingdom to the apostles. The gift is transferred from the Father to the Son to the apostles.

Col 1:25 - Paul calls his position a divine “office.” An office has successors. It does not terminate at death. Or it’s not an office. See also Heb. 7:23 – an office continues with another successor after the previous office-holder’s death.

1 Tim. 3:1 - Paul uses the word “episcopoi” (bishop) which requires an office. Everyone understood that Paul’s use of episcopoi and office meant it would carry on after his death by those who would succeed him.

Matt. 16:18 - no matter how sinful its members conduct themselves, Jesus promised that the gates of death will never prevail against the Church.

Matt. 23:2-3 - the Jewish people would have always understood the difference between a person’s sinfulness and his teaching authority. We see that the sinfulness of the Pharisees does not minimize their teaching authority. They occupy the “cathedra” of Moses.

Matt. 26:70-72; Mark 14:68-70; Luke 22:57; John 18:25-27 - Peter denied Christ three times, yet he was chosen to be the leader of the Church, and taught and wrote infallibly.

Mark 14:45 - Judas was unfaithful by betraying Jesus. But his apostolic office was preserved and this did not weaken the Church.

I hope that helps. :slight_smile:


The important point is that the office of the vizier was under the authority of the King, who could replace the vizier at will. The vizier cannot be appointed without the authority of the king. In the Christian context, Christ appoints Peter. Therefore in this case, the comparison between Matthew 16 and Isaiah 22 holds true. Every king had his vizier. If you want to know more about the authority of the vizier, I started a link on this in the scripture section.

So then the question becomes, if Peter was Christ’s Vizier on earth, even after the resurrection, it would have been up to Peter to determin how his authority would be transmitted throughout the centuries. We as Catholics believe that his authority was given to the bishop of Rome and we can produce evidence to that effect. Peter, and Peter’s successors are Christ’s regents until he returns.

God bless,


Revelation 1:18
I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

Ah, does not Jesus hold the keys?


Of course. The keys belonged to the king and he gave it to his vizier as a symbol of his authority. This is what Pharaoh did to Joseph in Genesis 41:39-44.

So Pharaoh said to Joseph: “Since God has made all this known to you, no one can be as wise and discerning as you are. You shall be in charge of my palace, and all my people shall dart at your command. Only in respect to the throne shall I outrank you. Herewith,” Pharaoh told Joseph, **“I place you in charge of the whole land of Egypt.” With that, Pharaoh took off *his signet ring ***and put it on Joseph’s finger. He had him dressed in robes of fine linen and put a gold chain about his neck. He then had him ride in the chariot of his vizier, and they shouted “Abrek!” before him. Thus was Joseph installed over the whole land of Egypt. “I, Pharaoh, proclaim,” he told Joseph, “that without your approval no one shall move hand or foot in all the land of Egypt.”

The keys, like the signit ring, are symbols of the authority of the king.

God bless,


The broken peg means Eliakim would also fail like Shebna. Someone would take his place and fail to live up to their high position. That’s because there was no promise of the Holy Spirit leading them, or protecting them, or guiding them into all truth. They were merely political figures whereas the office holders of the Eternal Kingdom are much more AND now the Holy Spirit is involved.

The new covenant was established to replace the old. In the same way, the old peg which continually broke loose in the Old Covenant is now replaced by the peg that will never break loose until King Jesus comes again to reveal the kingdom in a glorious manner. At that point no peg will be needed for the office of royal steward will have become a thing of the past. The delegated keys will be returned to the King has come back to receive us to himself on the Last Day.


Even if we read interpret these verse literally, these keys refer to death and Hades. The keys given to Peter refer to the keys of heaven.


Shebna and the prime minister’s role is a Type of the New Testament Papacy.

Like all Types in the OT, they are imperfect and/or incomplete. Whereas the NT arch-type has been perfected in Christ.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit