Earlier this year when I challenged myself to read 20 books I’d never read before, I built a list that was mostly fiction. Only two aren’t: The Gulag Archipelago and Pope Peter. This week, I thought I’d review one of these outliers. Pope Peter is a book written for Catholics who are looking to understand and defend the papacy, especially against arguments usually raised by Protestants. Bit different and certainly more niche, but let’s get into it.
Plot summary
The aim of Pope Peter is to provide the reader with a clear understanding of what the Papacy is and what it is not. The arguments are taken mostly from The Bible, allowing easier conversation with those who take a sola scriptura stance. It does also look at historical sources as well, which provides another strong avenue for discussion.
What I liked: a different take on the papacy
The last few years, I must admit to struggling with our current pope at times. It can be difficult to shift through the many things that Pope Francis says, understanding what is doctrine and what is not. Other times you wonder how things can go so wrong when God is meant to be leading His Church through the Pope.
I took up this book in an effort to better understand what the Pope is and what he is not. I wanted to understand what the Catholic Church teaches, so that I could avoid drifting into disagreement and take a more charitable outlook.
This book certainly refreshed my outlook on this subject. Mr Heschmeyer takes several Bible passages to explain the different facets of this teaching. His writing style is easy to understand and the book flows well. There are sections at the end of each chapter which cover the common objections that may be raised against his argument. He then refutes them using a mix of Biblical study and historical facts.
Pope Peter was logical, easy to understand and made good, solid argument. If you’re looking to better understand this (sometimes) thorny teaching, I highly recommend this read.
What I struggled with: not the most rivetting of books
While I can’t fault the content, I must admit that I struggled a little with this one. It may have been that I saw it like a textbook. I was there to learn, and it lacked the easy sparkle of good fiction.
It could also read a tiny bit triumphalist at times. The sections where he explains why Protestants are wrong can be quite blunt, which could be jaring if you are a Protestant yourself. I think you might need to find a more diplomatic way to put some of his arguments if you were actually going to use them in discussion with a non-Catholic.
Both of these things are, I acknowledge, very subjective. Other readers may not find this either dull or blunt. But this is how it struck me, so that’s how I’m reviewing.
In conclusion, I must stress that this is a very useful book for understanding the Papacy. It just might take a bit of work to get through.
