By Dominic V. Cassella

In the Gospel of John, our Lord is recorded as saying "I AM," the Greek "ego eimi," over forty times. The phrase should call to mind for the reader the episode in Exodus 3:14, when Moses encounters God and the burning bush. Moses asks for the name of God and the voice returns: "I AM."

St. Hilary of Poitiers tells us in his treatise of the Trinity that when he was a pagan and came across these words from Exodus, he knew - because of his philosophical training - that the speaker of these words must be the one and only, true God.

However, not all of the "I AM" statements are without qualification. Among these forty or so "I AM" statements in the Gospel of John, seven are attached to a predicate: "I am the bread of life" (6, Verse 35), "I am the light of the world" (8, Verse 12), "I am the door" (10, Verse9), "I am the good shepherd" (10, Verse11), "I am the resurrection and the life" (11, Verse 25), "I am the way, and the truth, and the life" (14, Verse 6), and "I am the true vine" (15, Verse 1).

The names as presented by John seem to demonstrate what is called a "chiastic" structure. The first and the last statement parallel and relate to each other, just as the second and the penultimate statements, as do the third and fifth - each pair mirroring the other until the pattern, like an archway, arrives at its summit and interpretive cornerstone.

Classic examples of chiastic structure exist in both Sacred Scripture and secular literature. The story of Noah, the Gospel of Mark, and many of the psalms, along with Dante's Divine Comedy and Homer's Odyssey, all exhibit this literary form - where ideas are arranged symmetrically to emphasize a central theme or turning point.

Notably, John's prologue uses the literary device to focus on John 1:12 - that believing in God is what makes us children of God. And likewise, it seems that the same literary tool is being used through the "I AM" statements to emphasize the fact that Jesus is the "Good Shepherd."

In fact, if you exclude John 21, that "Jesus is the Good Shepherd" is arguably the central thematic statement of the Gospel. And, when you factor back in John 21, what you have is an epilogue where Jesus now makes Peter his Vicar and Shepherd of His Church.

The Church Fathers frequently saw something important in Jesus' singling out of Peter in the last chapter of the Gospel of John. From John Chrysostom, Augustine, and Jerome to Theophylact of Bulgaria and Thomas Aquinas, those who comment on this Gospel see in Christ's command to Peter to "Feed my Sheep" and "Follow me" a reaffirmation (or even reinstitution) of primacy.

It seems that Peter had abandoned his role as "rock" when, in fear of being attacked by the Jews, he chose to deny Jesus Christ. Such a denial is both a great moral, but also theological failure on the part of Peter. In fact, if we think about where we get our word heresy, that is the Greek haireó, meaning "I choose," we might even call Peter's denial the ultimate heresy.

With the election of Leo XIV, we would do well to remind ourselves and consider deeply the foundations and implications of the Chair of St. Peter, that the pope is to be the Shepherd of Christ who feeds His sheep.

Indeed, in light of Diane Montagna's recent discovery of a CDF report that undermines the rationale of Pope Francis' Traditionis Custodes (which limited the use of the Traditional Latin Mass), allegedly because the bishops of the world were concerned about it (they weren't), understanding the papacy, synodality, and their limits is especially relevant today.

As one finds throughout history, knowing the full extent and limits of papal authority has resulted in a large range of opinions and fiery debate. Ultramontanism and Tradition: The Role of Papal Authority in the Catholic Faith, a 500-page anthology edited by Peter Kwasniewski, gathers together 50 articles that shed light on this subject from authors such as Cardinal Raymond Burke, Thomas Pink, Edward Feser, Bisho...