Ratzinger, Peter and the Papacy

Before reading the following it may be helpful to read the then Cardinal Ratzinger's Truth and Conscience. However, I quoted the relevant text below.

First a little recap on anamnesis, the "memory" in each of us:

The word anamnesis should be taken to mean exactly what Paul expressed in the second chapter of his Letter to the Romans: "When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts while their conscience also bears witness ..." (2:14 ff.).

This anamnesis of the origin, which results from the godlike constitution of our being is not a conceptually articulated knowing, a store of retrievable contents. It is so to speak an inner sense, a capacity to recall, so that the one whom it addresses, if he is not turned in on himself, hears its echo from within. He sees: "That's it! That is what my nature points to and seeks."

It is interesting, as you'll see in a little, that this refered to as a "memory" or an ability to "recall".

Ratzinger further states:

The anamnesis instilled in our being needs, one might say, assistance from without so that it can become aware of itself. But this "from without" is not something set in opposition to anamnesis but ordered to it. It has maieutic function, imposes nothing foreign, but brings to fruition what is proper to anamnesis, namely its interior openness to the truth.

This leads to his invocation of his concept of the papacy:

In the crisis of the Church today, the power of this recollection and the truth of the apostolic word is experienced in an entirely new way where much more so than hierarchical direction, it is the power of memory of the simple faith which leads to the discernment of spirits. One can only comprehend the primacy of the Pope and its correlation to Christian conscience in this connection. The true sense of this teaching authority of the Pope consists in his being the advocate of the Christian memory. The Pope does not impose from without. Rather, he elucidates the Christian memory and defends it.

I take the above as Ratzinger proposing that the Pope's primary responsibility or function is to remind other Christians, to bring forth fruit from their "anamnesis", and to be "an advocate of the Christian memory". Now here is where the "blow my mind" portion comes in and I don't know if Ratzinger had this in mind when he stated it but the apostle Peter speaks to the very same thing in 2 Peter 1:12-15,

12 For this reason I will not be negligent to remind you always of these things, though you know and are established in the present truth. 13 Yes, I think it is right, as long as I am in this tent, to stir you up by reminding you, 14 knowing that shortly I must put off my tent, just as our Lord Jesus Christ showed me. 15 Moreover I will be careful to ensure that you always have a reminder of these things after my decease.

Now whats especially important is verse 15:

Moreover I will be careful to ensure that you always have a reminder of these things after my decease.

Assuming Ratzinger's definition of conscience is biblical and his concept of the Pope is not a strict novelty, we can see that the apostle Peter may be laying out the very foundations of the Papacy. Notice that Peter, in some way, will "ensure" that a "reminder" will be available to Christians even after his death.

Now there's one thing that the Bishops of Rome can rightly be accused of. That is that they've claimed to be the successors of Peter and in some sense carry on his mission. I would say the entirety of Church history witnesses to this fact.

I know it may not rise above speculation but I can't think of anything else that Peter is said to have done just before his death other then establish the bishop of Rome as his successor. The only thing that may come close is the gospel of Mark. However, tradition states (to my knowledge) the gospel of Mark wasn't even Peter's idea at all. Furthermore a written work isn't of the same order as a living person. No, I think this "reminder" is to be more active, able to respond to different circumstances. Not a reliance so much on the individual to interpret but on the individual to receive.