Ioannis D.
Karavidopoulos
Peter in the New Testament Church
“Le rôle de
Pierre et son importance dans l’Eglise du Nouveau Testament: problématique
exégétique contemporaine,”
Nicolaus. Revista
di Teologia ecumenico-patristica. New Series 19 (1992): 13-29.
The author considers Petrine texts in the NT as a whole, basing his exegesis
on (especially Greek) Orthodox tradition and the church fathers, with
reference to contemporary studies.
DID PETER have the same difficulties that Mark shows
the other disciples had in understanding Jesus’mission and role as Messiah?
Upset at Jesus unexpected departure when he went out
to pray, “Simon and his companions went out to find him” (Mk 1 :36). Simon
is distinguished from “his companions,” but he too has failed to understand
Jesus' universal mission, as seen by Jesus’ words, “Let us go to the
neighboring towns, so I may proclaim the message there also; for that is
what I came out to do” (v. 38). Simon and his companions want a Jesus
limited to the town where “everyone is searching for [him]" (v. 37).
The others report the rumors on who Jesus is (“John
the Baptist ... Elijah ... one of the prophets”). It is Peter who confesses
the messianic identity (“You are the Christ,” 8:27-33), but Jesus turns and
orders the disciples as a whole not to tell anyone (v. 30).
Jesus replaces Peter's “the Christ” with the title
“Son of Μan” (v. 31), a title more closely linked with the passion. When
Peter opposes the passion, Jesus rebukes him in particular, although
he turns and looks at the disciples as a whole, and to Peter he addresses
the harshest words, “Get behind me Satan!”
By shifting to “Son of Μan,” Jesus alludes to the
passion and corrects Peter’s Jewish messianic expectations; Peter’s
confession is worthwhile only if linked to the cross and passion, which
neither he nor the others seem to understand. We think Jesus’ words on
taking up the cross and following him are general, and not for Peter in
particular.
Corresponding to Peter’s threefold denial (Mk
14:29-31, 66-72), Mark notes three times that the disciples slept while
Jesus prayed (14:37a, 40, 41). The first time “he said to Peter, ‘Simon, are
you asleep?’” In his narrative the evangelist uses “Peter,” while Jesus’
question uses the original name, Simon! Further, the evangelist . sets
Jesus’ messianic confession before the high priest (14:61-62) over against
Peter’s threefold denial before the high priest’s servant (14:66).
Commentators have stressed Peter's denial while
ignoring the fact that he was the only disciple to follow Jesus “right into
the court yard” (14:54). But the fourth evangelist will say Jesus was also
followed by John, who intervened with the high priest to let Peter come in
(Jn 18:16).
At the empty tomb the women are told to "go tell his
disciples and Peter" (Mk 16:7). (In Matthew and Luke, Peter is not mentioned
separately.) Some see this separate mention as Peter's reinstatement after
his denial of Jesus. T. Smith shows an anti-Petrine stance when he sees this
negatively: Peter is not acknowledged as a disciple as are the others (1985
dissertation).
Mark is neither ‘pro- nor anti- Peter,’ but his
general stress is on the disciples' difficulty in understanding Jesus'
person and mission. He is not polemical, but wants to teach his readers how
weak they are without the Holy Spirit, just as the disciples were weak in
trying to understand their master.
Matthew
Contemporary study on Mt 16:17-19 (Peter and the keys)
indicates that there is a historical kernel to the scene, that the verses
form an authentic unity, and that the words come not from Jesus but from the
church at a time of struggle between Judeo and Gentile Christians in the
Church of Syria. Orthodox exegesis admits that the words are authentic but
asks some questions.
a) Is Matthew trying to correct a devalued view of
Peter? He does indeed give a more favorable view than Mark does. In listing
the Twelve, he puts Peter first (10:2); Peter is seen walking on the water
just as Jesus did (14:22-33); Jesus orders him to pay the temple tax for
both of them (17:27); at the Transfiguration Peter says, “I will make three
dwellings here” (17:4) instead of "Let's make" as in Mark and Luke. And
Matthew omits “for he did not know what to say” (Mk 9:6) and “not knowing
what he said” (Lk 9:33). Matthew’s image of Peter culminates with the
profession of faith and Jesus’ words to him at Caesarea Philippi.
Some say that in stressing Peter’s supremacy in
relation to the other disciples Matthew is opposing those who are putting
forward a leader, James the brother of Jesus; others say he is opposing
those who advocate Paul; and others that he is correcting Mark's devalued
image of Peter. There are no solid bases for these claims. John Chrysostom
is most persuasive when he says that in his confession Peter is “the
mouthpiece of the apostles,” “the leader of the chorus of the apostles.”
b) What meaning are we to give to “and on this rock I
will build my church”? Did the Lord promise to build his church once and for
all on Peter (Roman Catholic view)? On the faith that Jesus is Messiah, the
Son of God (Orthodox and Protestant view)? On Peter the rock, which shows
Peter's primacy, but only during his lifetime (O. Cullmann, 1952)?
According to John Chrysostom, Jesus means to build his
church “on the confession of faith. At that time he shows that many will
believe; he encourages [Peter] and appoints him as shepherd.”
But John has no trouble calling Peter “steadier than
any rock” though he may be but a simple sinner (PG 58, 534).
Theophylactus notes that “The Lord rewards Peter by...
[promising to] build his church on him.” But immediately afterwards: “This
profession of faith ... is to be the foundation of believers so that every
person in the future who will build his house of faith will have this
profession as a foundation. For even if we had myriads of virtues,
without a sound profession of faith, we build in vain (PG 123, 320).”
Euthymios Zigabenos has a similar view (PG 129,
468).
Origen sums up the perspective of many Greek fathers:
“Each disciple ... is a rock, and it is on this rock that every word of the
church is built. ... If you think that it is only on Peter that the church
is built ... what would you say of John ... or ... of the apostles?”
Origen stresses that everything Jesus says to Peter
concerns all the disciples, i.e., all who want to become like Peter. All who
imitate Christ become spiritual rocks, and we can understand the Savior's
words as being said to all (PG 13, 997, 1000).
Orthodox exegetes will not question the authority of
these words, but neither will they accept an exegetical exaggeration that
holds for an eternal primacy.
c) Is the power to bind and loose given to Peter
alone? Orthodox exegetes will say it is given to all the Apostles. (See also
Mt 18:18; Jn 20:22-23).
Luke
Luke's Peter is not treated as ‘Satan’ in the
profession of faith scene; nor does Jesus reproach him for falling asleep at
Gethsemane. (Luke says the disciples fell asleep from the exhaustion caused
by grief.) Peter's denial is narrated concisely and without condemnation
(22:54-62). The prophecy that “from now on you will be catching people,” is
addressed particularly to Peter (5:1-11). Luke is the only one to mention
the appearance of the Risen Christ to Peter.
Luke's picture of Peter, then, is favorable.
Why does Jesus pray for Peter and order him ro
"strengthen your brothers" (22:31-34)? Apparently he sees that Peter will be
more exposed to temptation than the others, for immediately afterwards he
predicts the threefold denial (v.34). Peter has always shown zeal and love
for Jesus, and Jesus will not leave him without help in temptation.
The passage, then, is not an ‘important statement on
Peter’s future role’ (Μ.J. Lagrange), but on Jesus’ interest in his
‘brothers’-i.e., his church. Finally we note the verb: “When once you
have turned back (epistrepsas), strengthen your brothers.”
Epistrepsas is not to be taken as active and transitive, but as
middle-passive and intransitive The Greek fathers stress Jesus' tenderness
here for his ‘group leader’ disciple.
The church fathers lived at a time when a pro- or
anti- wesrem position was not a concern. Therefore they do not hesitate to
speak laudatory or deprecatory words of Peter; they do not imagine that
their words will be used either to support a view of Ihe papacy or to
reinforce an anti-Catholic position.
John
In comparing Peter and ‘the disciple whom Jesus
loved,’ exegetes have noted a slight advantage given to John. When Jesus
washes his disciples’ feet (Jn 13) Peter has trouble understanding, but the
same story shows John as the one to whom Jesus revealed the traitor. Peter
denies knowing Jesus, but John is at the cross and is entrusted with
the care of Jesus’ mother (19:25-27). And at the empty tomb it was John, not
Peter, who "saw and believed" (20:8).
After the resurrection
If Peter is first witness of the resurrection (“he
appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve,” 1 Cor 15:5), the first believer,
the first Christian, it means only that he was the object of grace, without
thereby gaining a special place or power. It would be wrong to see this
first apparition as a ‘mythicization’ of his role.
“The first encounter...with Peter is fundamental for
faith, because it witnesses to... the center of Christian faith. But we
cannot presume from that anything on Peter's place in the church. [His ...
place in the church is in connection with his place in the ecclesiological
body of the Twelve and with his apostolic function (V. Stoyannos).”
Peter's place among the Twelve we have considered in
the first part of this article.
Feed my lambs
John 21 is added not simply to tell about Jesus’ third
appearance, but about Peter and John, “especially about their death, still
in connection with ... chapters 1 to 20 where the well-loved disciple has a
greater authority in understanding Jesus and his teaching (S. Agouridis).”
When Jesus appears on the bank of the Tiberias it is
John who first recognizes him and exclaims, “It is the Lord” (21:7).
The central message of the chapter is in 21:15ff where
Jesus asks Peter, "Do you love me more than these?" He then commands Peter
to “Feed my lambs” and predicts his martyrdom. He does not intend to give
Peter more responsibility than the others but to recall the promise Peter
had been unable to keep: to “lay down my life for you” (13:37). Peter does
not dare to say he loves more than the other disciples do; aware of his
weakness and with a broken heart he says, “Lord, you know everything; you
know that I love you.” Then Jesus appoints him to shepherd the sheep in the
same way the others have this responsibility. And just as Jesus is ‘the good
shepherd’ who ‘gives his life for the sheep’ ( 10:11 ), so is Peter called
to be like Jesus [“Follow me,” 21:19], in this way keeping the promise to
lay down his life. It is in this context that Jesus predicts Peter's
martyrdom (21:18-19), a death that will make him fully a disciple and a true
shepherd of sheep.
We stress the close link between Peter's pastoral
service and his resulting martyrdom. From this perspective, any discussion
on primacy comes into the realm of the rulers and sovereigns of this world
of corruption and sin. For Christian leaders it is not to be thus, but
responsibility is a service and martyrdom according to the model of the Good
Shepherd.
Acts
In Acts we see Peter take leadership initiatives, but
always in the context of responsibility of the Twelve or of the church of
Jerusalem. He never acts without agreement of or supervision by the
others. In choosing Matthias to replace Judas, Peter takes the initiative
(1:15), but Matthias is chosen after the casting of lots and the prayer of
the whole community (1:23-26).
On Pentecost; “Peter, standing with the eleven” (2:14)
begins to speak to the
crowd. It is as a group that the apostles decide to
send Peter and John to Samaria (8:14) and Barnabas to Antioch (11:22).
Peter seems to be accountable to the others, especially after Cornelius is
received into the faith. Taken aside by ‘the circumcised believers,’ he
explains ‘step by step’ (11:3-4) to show that he acted as he did because God
had ordered it.
After being delivered from prison, Peter visited the
brothers and asked that James be advised. “Then he left and went to another
place” (12:17). It seems this ‘other place’ was the mission within the
Judaic world (cf. Gal 2:7-8).
Peter reappears at the Council of Jerusalem. He speaks
first (Acts 15:7), but the final word is by James, and the Council's
decision begins: “For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us ...”
(15:28). Earlier the decision was summed up:
“Then the apostles and the elders, with the consent of
the whole church, decided to choose men from among their members... and to
send them to Antioch...” (15:22).
After the Council Paul was highly critical of Peter
who “used to eat with Gentiles” but drew back and kept himself separate for
fear of the “circumcision faction” (Gal 2:12). This faction consisted of
those who agreed with James. O. Cullmann says Peter’s action shows that it
was not Peter but James who had the primacy. And when Pau1 refers to the
leaders in the same epistle, he lists "James and Cephas and John" (2:9).
Only a few mss. list Peter first.
The Orthodox exegete V. Stoyannos says the order of
names does not mean anything, since Paul was not concerned with the
hierarchy of church leaders in Jerusalem. Pau1 is more interested in
theology and in justifying the gospel he preaches. Stoyannos also observes
that in Galatians (esp. 2:7-8) we find the first mention of Peter's Greek
name. The translation of the honorary surname Cephas into the Greek Petros
is the counterpart of the transcription of the Hebrew Messiah into Christos.
It witnesses to Peter's place of honor in the early church. We conclude from
Acts and Galatians that Peter has a leading role in the church after Easter,
but always ίii the context of the Twelve. After a certain time this
leading role is held by James, though there is no mention of a transmission
of powers or succession. Concern is with the movement of the gospel message
from Jerusalem to the rest of the Roman Empire rather than with those who
proclaim that message or with their authority and primacy.
Today Peter can be a pole only of unity, not of
division. The Orthodox Church celebrates the feast of Peter and Paul
together, stressing “Peter's steadfastness, Paul’s moderation and ...
wisdom, and the true divine inspiration of the two.” We summarize our
conclusions:
1) “The one foundation is Jesus Christ” ( 1-Cor
3:11 ). But Pau1 also speaks of the “building of the faithful,” “built upon
the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus... as...
cornerstone” (Eph 2:20). And the Apocalypse says Jerusalem “has twelve
foundations, and on them are the twelve names of the twelve apostles”
(21:14). Within the Twelve, Peter has a prominent place during his life, a
place acknowledged by Christ himself. But Christ does not speak of a
primacy beyond Peter's life.
2) The words on Peter as rock of faith (Mt 16:18) are
authentic. The fathers and Orthodox exegetes will interpret them as
confessing the messianic faith -the faith of every disciple and
believer- that Jesus is Son of the living God.
3) Βy connecting Mt 16:18, Lk 22:31-34, and Jn
21:15-19, we show that whatever primacy Peter had is a primacy not of power
but of service, of sacrifice, of martyrdom. The pastoral charge he
received (Jn 21 ) does not show his superiority over the others, but his
re-establishment after his denial to the level of the others who carry out
the same pastoral work with the anticipation of martyrdom. Martus
takes on the twofold meaning of ‘witness’ and ‘martyr.’
4) It is incomprehensible to speak of power and
primacy in the early church, because God's omnipotent action in history does
not leave space for human power (Stoyannos). Further, any NT data on a
special role for any apostle “cannot have any meaning of power, strength,
supremacy, or of government, for those notions are ... foreign to the notion
of Christ’s apostle (I. Anastassiou).” The apostle's essential task is to
proclaim the gospel message “to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). (RJ)
ΘΗΣΑΥΡΟΣ ΤΗΣ ΚΑΙΝΗΣ ΔΙΑΘΗΚΗΣ
