Why Didn't the Church Preserve the 12?

Today I wanted to address an argument I've encountered regarding the logic of the Papacy.  It has to do with the logic of continuing one office while discontinuing others.  Let's dive in.

Recent events in Catholic / Protestant circles have put new focus on arguments for the office of the Pope.  The basic Catholic argument goes like this:

• In Matthew 16, Jesus announced His intention to install Peter in an office
• This office is analogous to the chief steward of the Davidic monarchies of the Old Testament
• Thus, Peter would serve as the chief executive of the nascent Church

That argument gets Peter to the office of the Pope.  But now we need a second step - we need to argue that this office continued.  That part is trickier, because the New Testament only addresses the history of the Church preceding Peter's death.  It doesn't tell us what happened after Peter died.

So the argument here is going to be one of rational inference, typology, and history.  It sounds a bit like this:

• The history of the Church [shows] that Peter's office did have successors.
• The office which Jesus uses to analogize Peter's office, the chief steward, was an office with successive members.
• If Jesus thought it was appropriate for the Church to have a chief executive at its founding, it only makes sense that the need for such an office would continue.  

And with that, we have our argument for the Papacy.    

A Skeptical Response:

Now, someone could respond with the following argument.  

Jesus set up the Apostles in 12 offices as well.  He said:

"Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." - Matthew 19:28

And in this case, we can actually see Peter saying an office of the 12 (the one held by Judas) should be preserved.  He said:

“Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. For he was numbered among us and was allotted his share in this ministry. For it is written in the Book of Psalms, ‘May his camp become desolate, and let there be no one to dwell in it’ and ‘Let another take his office.’" - Acts 16-20

So now the counter-argument can be made:

• Jesus also saw a need for 12 Apostles for the Church
• So if there was a need to preserve the Papacy, then shouldn't there be a need to preserve the 12?
• But the Catholic Church didn't preserve the 12 offices of the Apostles
• So why should it preserve the office of Peter? It seems like the same argument applies to both. 

A Tentative Answer:

While it is true that we see the office of Judas among the 12 being replaced, we have a counter example with the Apostle James.  He is killed by King Herod in the book of Acts:

"It was about this time that King Herod arrested some who belonged to the church, intending to persecute them. He had James, the brother of John, put to death with the sword." - Acts 12:1-2

After that death, the Apostles did not try to replace him among the twelve.  What can we conclude from this?  

Well, it would seem that Peter thought it was important that the Church start off with 12 Apostles, but not that it continue with 12 Apostles.  

So, that's the core reason why the Church doesn't have the office of the 12 today - because we're shown in the New Testament that it wasn't a requirement moving forward.

The Core Function:

But that isn't the end of the story, because the Church does believe that the 12 Apostles had successors - in a sense.  We need to ask the question:  

What was the core function of the Apostles?

Well, the core function of the Apostles was to lead, govern, and teach the Church.  They could also appoint bishops and meet in council to settle disputes.   With that in mind, the [early Christians] recognized that the ministry of the 12 was succeeded by the role of the Bishops.  Saint Clement of Rome said the following:

“Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason, they appointed those ministers already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry."  - Epistle to the Corinthians, 42

And in that sense, the core purpose of their ministry did not perish from the earth. 

Now let's turn our attention to the office of the Papacy.  What is the core function of the Papacy?  He is meant to be a chief executive, someone who can settle disputes even among the other Bishops.  

Whereas the core function of the 12 Apostles wasn't necessary to be tied to the number 12, the whole concept of a chief executive demands an office held by one man.   

Perish from the Earth:

Thus, the Catholic answer would be this:

Saint Peter thought it was important for the offices of the 12 to be filled by 12 men at the start of the Church.  But as we see after the death of James, the preservation of those offices was not something needed going forward.  The office of the Bishops kept the core mission of the Apostles - governing, teaching, ordination, collegiality -  was successfully passed on through the bishops.  However, the core purpose of the office of steward - to be a chief executive - needs to be filled by one man.  If not, that function which Jesus gave the Church in Peter would have perished from the earth.  Thus, the Papacy continues.

And now I think the question can be turned around:

I've shown how the mission of the 12 was preserved in the Church by the existence of the bishops.  Why do you think the mission of the Steward, Peter, was supposed to perish from the earth?