Tough argument on Papal Infallibility

[Randy_Carson]

PROTESTANT SCHOLARS ON PETER AS THE ROCK

R.T. France

Jesus now sums up Peter’s significance in a name, Peter . . . It describes not so much Peter’s character (he did not prove to be ‘rock-like’ in terms of stability or reliability), but his function, as the foundation-stone of Jesus’ church. The feminine word for ‘rock’, ‘petra’, is necessarily changed to the masculine ‘petros’ (stone) to give a man’s name, but the word-play is unmistakable (and in Aramaic would be even more so, as the same form ‘kepha’ would occur in both places). It is only Protestant overreaction to the Roman Catholic claim . . . that what is here said of Peter applies also to the later bishops of Rome, that has led some to claim that the ‘rock’ here is not Peter at all but the faith which he has just confessed. The word-play, and the whole structure of the passage, demands that this verse is every bit as much Jesus’ declaration about Peter as v.16 was Peter’s declaration about Jesus . . . It is to Peter, not to his confession, that the rock metaphor is applied . . . Peter is to be the foundation-stone of Jesus’ new community . . . which will last forever.

(R.T. France (Anglican); in Morris, Leon, General editor, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press / Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1985, vol. 1: Matthew, 254, 256)

D.A. Carson

On the basis of the distinction between ‘petros’ . . . and ‘petra’ . . . , many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church. Peter is a mere ‘stone,’ it is alleged; but Jesus himself is the ‘rock’ . . . Others adopt some other distinction . . . Yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Roman Catholic interpretation, it is doubtful whether many would have taken ‘rock’ to be anything or anyone other than Peter . . . The Greek makes the distinction between ‘petros’ and ‘petra’ simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine ‘petra’ could not very well serve as a masculine name . . . Had Matthew wanted to say no more than that Peter was a stone in contrast with Jesus the Rock, the more common word would have been ‘lithos’ (‘stone’ of almost any size). Then there would have been no pun - and that is just the point! . . . In this passage Jesus is the builder of the church and it would be a strange mixture of metaphors that also sees him within the same clauses as its foundation . . .

(D.A. Carson (Baptist); in Gaebelein, Frank E., Gen. editor, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984, vol. 8: Matthew, Mark, Luke {Matthew: D.A. Carson}, 368)

William F. Albright

In view of the background of verse 19 . . . one must dismiss as confessional interpretation * any attempt to see this rock as meaning the faith, or the Messianic confession of Peter* . . . The general sense of the passage is indisputable . . . Peter is the rock on which the new community will be built, and in that community, Peter’s authority to ‘bind’ or ‘release’ will be a carrying out of decisions made in heaven. His teaching and disciplinary activities will be similarly guided by the Spirit to carry out Heaven’s will.

(William F. Albright [Methodist] and C.S. Mann, Anchor Bible, Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1971, vol. 26, 195, 197-198)

J.D. Douglas

. . . That the rock is Peter himself . . . is found almost as early as the other [interpretation], for Tertullian and the bishop, whether Roman or Carthaginian, against whom he thundered in De Pudicitia, assume this, though with different inferences. Its strength lies in the fact that Mt 16:19 is in the singular, and must be addressed directly to Peter . . . Many Protestant interpreters, including notably Cullmann, take the latter view.

(New Bible Dictionary, ed. J.D. Douglas, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1962, 972)

(cont.)

 

[Randy_Carson]

D.W. O’Connor

Though in the past some authorities have considered that the term rock refers to Jesus himself or to Peter’s faith, the consensus of the great majority of scholars today is that the most obvious and traditional understanding should be construed, namely, that rock refers to the person of Peter.

(Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1985 edition, “Peter,” Micropedia, vol. 9, 330-333. D. W. O’Connor, the author of the article, is himself Protestant and author of Peter in Rome: The Literary, Liturgical and Archaeological Evidence [1969] )

D. Guthrie & J.A. Motyer

Some interpreters have . . . referred to Jesus as the rock here, but the context is against this. Nor is it likely that Peter’s faith or Peter’s confession is meant. It is undoubtedly Peter himself who is to be the rock, but Peter confessing, faithful and obedient . . . The leading role which Peter played is shown throughout the early chapters of Acts.

(New Bible Commentary, Guthrie, D. & J.A. Motyer, eds., Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 3rd ed., 1970 [Reprinted, 1987, as *The Eerdmans Bible Commentary], 837)

Robert McAfee Brown

Protestants are learning that the crucial passage in Matthew 16 about the ‘rock’ on which the church will be built almost certainly refers to Peter himself rather than to his faith.

(Robert McAfee Brown, in McCord, Peter J., editor, A Pope For All Christians?, New York: Paulist Press, 1976, Introduction, 7. This book is an ecumenical project offering views on the papacy from many perspectives. Brown is a Presbyterian and very prominent ecumenist)

Raymond E. Brown, et. al.

Precisely because of the Aramaic identity of ‘Kepha’/‘kepha’, there can be no doubt that the rock on which the church was to be built was Peter. Is this true also for Matthew in whose Greek there is the slight difference ‘Petros’/‘petra’? Probably the most common view would be that it is . . . It would be pointless to list all the commentaries holding this view, but it is found in [a] popular one-volume commentary . . . ; K. Stendahl in Peake’s Commentary on the Bible (2nd rev. ed.; London: Nelson, 1962), p. 787.

(Peter in the New Testament, Brown, Raymond E., Karl P. Donfried and John Reumann, editors, Minneapolis: Augsburg Pub. House / New York: Paulist Press, 1973, 92-93. This is probably the most important ecumenical work on Peter, and is thus cited first in a long bibliography in the Encyclopedia Britannica. It is a common statement by a panel of eleven Catholic and Lutheran scholars)

Marvin Vincent (Protestant Greek Scholar)

The word refers neither to Christ as a rock, distinguished from Simon, a stone, nor to Peter’s confession, but to Peter himself, . . . The reference of petra to Christ is forced and unnatural. The obvious reference of the word is to Peter. The emphatic this naturally refers to the nearest antecedent; and besides, the metaphor is thus weakened, since Christ appears here, not as the foundation, but as the architect: “On this rock will I build.” Again, Christ is the great foundation, the chief cornerstone, but the New Testament writers recognize no impropriety in applying to the members of Christ’s church certain terms which are applied to him. For instance, Peter himself (1 Peter 2:4), calls Christ a living stone, and in ver. 5, addresses the church as living stones . . .

Equally untenable is the explanation which refers petra to Simon’s confession. Both the play upon the words and the natural reading of the passage are against it, and besides, it does not conform to the fact, since the church is built, not on confessions, but on confessors – living men . . . . . .

(Word Studies in the New Testament, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1946 [orig. 1887], 4 vols., vol. 1, 91-92; emphasis in original

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

Forgive me for any insult - unintentional I assure you. It’s just that whenever this argument arises, you don’t often hear Latins admit that Jesus is the Rock. In fact, I think Gandalf the White is the first who has made the admission in this thread.

If you will permit this suggestion from an Oriental Catholic in this Latin Forum - whenever you hear ANYONE claim Jesus is the Rock in opposition to Peter, the PROPER and IMMEDIATE response should ALWAYS be “Of course Jesus is the Rock…” and THEN move on to demonstrate why Peter is ALSO the Rock. Immediately jumping into a demonstration that Peter is the Rock causes more problems than it solves, serving only to steel the other side’s false dichotomy on the matter. The best method to counter the “Jesus is the Rock” argument is to demolish the false dichotomy inherent in the non-Catholic mindset. That’s just my opinion.

Forgive me, once again, for any insult to my Latin brethren.

Humbly,
Marduk

Just as Jesus is the Good Shepherd AND He tells Peter to feed and care for the sheep while He is away in John 21.

Both-and.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

The Primacy of Peter
The Church Fathers not only recognized that Peter was the rock on whom Christ built his Church, they also recognized the implications of this fact — that Peter had a special place or primacy among the apostles.
CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA
“[T]he blessed Peter, the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute [Matt. 17:27], quickly grasped and understood their meaning. And what does he say? 'Behold, we have left all and have followed you”’ [Matt. 19:27, Mark 10:28] (Who Is the Rich Man That is Saved? 21:3-5 [a.d. 200]).
TERTULLIAN
“[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18-19]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to *you *the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loosed, not what they shall have bound or they shall have loosed” (Modesty 21:9-10 [a.D. 220]).
LETTER OF CLEMENT TO JAMES
“Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first-fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect” (Letter of Clement to James 2 [a.d. 221]).
ORIGEN
"f we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter . . . a great difference and a preeminence in the things [Jesus] said to Peter, compared with the second class [of apostles]. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in [all] the heavens, as .in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens" (Commentary on Matthew 13:31 [a.d. 248]).
CYPRIAN
"The Lord says to Peter: 1 say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ . . . On him he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was , but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4 [a.d. 251]).
CYRIL OF JERUSALEM
“In the power of the same Holy Spirit, Peter, both the chief of the apostles and the keeper of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, in the name of Christ healed Aeneas the paralytic at Lydda, which is now called Diospolis” [Acts 9:32-34] (Catechetical Lectures, 17:27 [a.d. 350]).

(cont.)

 

[Randy_Carson]

EPHRAIM**
"Jesus said:] Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the first-born in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures" (Homilies 4:1 [a.d. 3 51]).
AMBROSE
"[Christ] made answer: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church …’ Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]?" (The Faith 4:5 [a.d. 379]).
POPE DAMASUS I
"Likewise it is decreed . . . that it ought to be announced that . . . the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven …’ [Matt. 16:18-19]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it" (Decree of Damasus 3 [a.d. 382]).
JEROME
"Simon Peter, the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion . . . pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord" (Lives of Illustrious Men I [a.d. 396]).
POPE INNOCENT I
"In seeking the things of God . . . you have acknowledged that judgment is to be referred to us [the pope] and have shown that you know that is owed to the Apostolic See [Rome], if all of us placed in this position are to desire to follow the apostle himself [Peter] from whom the episcopate itself and the total authority of this name have emerged" (Letters 29:1 [a.d. 408]).
AUGUSTINE
"Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear 1 will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven"’ (Sermons 295:2 [a.d. 411]).
AUGUSTINE
**“Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?” (Commentary on John 56:1 [a.d. 416]).
**COUNCIL OF EPHESUS
**“Philip, the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See [Rome] said: ‘There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors’” (Acts of the Council, session 3 [a.d. 431]).

(cont.)

 

[Randy_Carson]

POPE LEO I**
"Our Lord Jesus Christ . . . established the worship belonging to the divine [Christian] religion . . . But the Lord desired that the sacrament of this gift should pertain to all the apostles in such a way that it might be found principally in the most blessed Peter, the highest of all the apostles. And he wanted his gifts to flow into the entire body from Peter himself, as if from the head, in such a way that anyone who had dared to separate himself from the solidarity of Peter would realize that he was himself no longer a sharer in the divine mystery" (Letters 10:1 [a.d. 445]).
POPE LEO I
"Although bishops have a common dignity, they are not all of the same rank. Even among the most blessed apostles, though they were alike in honor, there was a certain distinction of power. “All were equal in being chosen, but it was given to one to be preeminent over the others. . . . [So today through the bishops] the care of the universal Church would converge in the one See of Peter, and nothing should ever be at odds with this head” (ibid., 14:11).
POPE LEO I
"[T]he blessed Peter persevering in the strength of the rock, which he has received, has not abandoned the helm of the Church, which he understood. For he was ordained before the rest in such a way that, from his being called the rock, from his being pronounced the foundation, from his being constituted the doorkeeper of the kingdom of heaven, from his being set as the umpire to bind and loose, whose judgments shall retain their validity in heaven, from all these mystical tides we might know the nature of his association with Christ" (Sermons 3:2-3 [a.d. 450]).
AMBROSE **[A.D. 339-397]
Born at Treves, Ambrose was trained in rhetoric and law and in 370 became the consul of Liguria and Emilia, but resided in Milan. When the Arian bishop of Milan, Auxentius, died, the Catholic and Arian parties began a conflict over who would be his successor. Ambrose, then a catechumen, intervened and was surprised to find himself named as the choice of both parties. He was ordained bishop in 374, a week after he was baptized.
Ambrose was a prolific and brilliant writer, especially of pastoral theology. He managed to prevent the Roman senate from restoring a statue of the goddess of victory to the senate chambers and compelled the Emperor Theodosius to do public penance after a massacre of 7,000 people. Though a man of accomplishment in his own right, he is often remembered as the man who converted an even greater Church Father, Augustine.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[Subrosa]

John Chrysostom, the great Bishop of Byzantium and author of the Divine Liturgy still used today by the Orthodox, takes this position on Peter…

From Homily VI on Acts 2:22…
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf111.vi.vi.html

Therefore also this holy leader of the blessed company, the lover of Christ, the good shepherd, the man put in trust with the keys of heaven, the man who received the Spiritual Wisdom,

From Homily 88 on John 22:15…
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf111.vi.vi.html

There are indeed many other things which are able to give us boldness towards God, and to show us bright and approved, but that which most of all brings good will from on high, is tender care for our neighbor. Which therefore Christ requireth of Peter. For when their eating was ended, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me more than these? He saith unto Him, Yea, Lord, Thou knowest that I love Thee.”
“He saith unto him, Feed My sheep.” And why, having passed by the others, doth He speak with Peter on these matters? He was the chosen one of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the leader of the band; on this account also Paul went up upon a time to enquire of him rather than the others. And at the same time to show him that he must now be of good cheer, since the denial was done away, ” Jesus putteth into his hands the chief authority among the brethren;

So, it seems that someone in the Eastern church had the conviction that Peter was appointed head of the apostles by Jesus.

Subrosa

 

[Maryam]

John Chrysostom, the great Bishop of Byzantium and author of the Divine Liturgy still used today by the Orthodox, takes this position on Peter…

From Homily VI on Acts 2:22…
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf111.vi.vi.html

From Homily 88 on John 22:15…
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf111.vi.vi.html
So, it seems that someone in the Eastern church had the conviction that Peter was appointed head of the apostles by Jesus.

Subrosa

Correction on the link to Homily 88 on John 22:15…

ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf114.iv.xc.html

By mistake you put the same url for for Homily VI in the two links…

Love the Early Church Fathers…

God bless

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

So, it seems that someone in the Eastern church had the conviction that Peter was appointed head of the apostles by Jesus.

St John Chrysostom wrote the same of several f the Apostles. I can think of Saint James of Jerusalem and Saint John ther Beloved.

For example, writing of the Council of Jerusalem he attributes to James a higher authority than Peter’s.

“Then all the multitude kept silence,” etc. (v. 12.) There was no arrogancein the Church. After Peter Paul speaks, and none silences him: James waits patiently, not starts up (for the next word). Great the orderliness (of the proceedings). No word speaks John here, no word the other Apostles, but held their peace, for James was invested with the chief rule, and think it no hardship. So clean was their soul from love of glory. “And after that they had held their peace, James answered,” etc. (v. 13.) Peter indeed spoke more strongly, but James here more mildly: for thus it behooves one in high authority, to leave what is unpleasant for others to say, while he himself appears in the milder part."
**
Homily XXXIII. Acts 15:13, 15
St. John Chrysostom
ccel.org/fathers/NPNF1-11/Chrysostom/Acts/Acts-Hom33.html

**

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Now to look at what he has to say of Saint John the Divine. He gives to John the keys which some believe are restricted to Peter - but this was not the belief of the early Catholic Church of which Saint John Chrysostom is a shining example.

“For the son of thunder, the beloved of Christ,** the pillar of the Churches throughout the world, who holds the keys of heaven,** who drank the cup of Christ, and was baptized with His baptism, who lay upon his Master’s bosom with much confidence, this man comes forward to us now…. By this Apostle stand the powers from above, marveling at the beauty of his soul, and his understanding, and the bloom of that virtue by which he drew unto him Christ Himself, and obtained the grace of the Spirit. For he hath made ready his soul, as some well-fashioned and jeweled lyre with strings of gold, and yielded it for the utterance of something great and sublime to the Spirit” (St. John Chrysostom, First Homily on the Gospel of St. John).

“Were John about to converse with us, and to say to us words of his own, we needs must describe his family, his country, and his education. But since it is not he, but God by him, that speaks to mankind, it seems to me superfluous and distracting to enquire into these matters. And yet even thus it is not superfluous, but even very necessary. For when you have learned who he was, and from whence, who his parents, and what his character, and then hear his voice and all his heavenly wisdom, then you shall know right well that these (doctrines) belong not to him, but to the Divine power stirring his soul…. Not so this fisherman; for all he saith is infallible; and standing as it were upon a rock, he never shifts his ground. For since he has been thought worthy to be in the most secret places, and has the Lord of all speaking within him, he is subject to nothing that is human” (St. John Chrysostom, Second Homily on the Gospel of St. John). ]

 

[mark_a]

Saint Augustine, as he grew mature in his faith and theological writings, personally rejected the idea that Peter is the rock.

Saint Augustine:

“Peter, who a short time before had confessed that Christ was the Son of God, and who in return for that confession, had been called the rock upon which the Church should be built, etc.;” but he explains his meaning in several other works. Let us give a few specimens: “Peter received this name from the Lord to signify the Church; for it is Christ who is THE rock, and Peter is the CHRISTIAN PEOPLE. THE ROCK is the principal word; this is why Peter is derived from the Rock, and not the rock from Peter; precisely as the word Christ is not from Christian, but Christian from Christ. ‘Thou art therefore Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church. I will build thee on myself-I will not be built on thee.’”

“The Church,” he says again, “is built on the rock after which Peter was named. That rock was Christ, and it is on this foundation that Peter himself was to be raised.”

In his book of Retractations (where he corrects the errors of his younger writing days) Saint Augustine says:

"In that book, I said in one place, in speaking of St. Peter, that the Church had been built on him as on the rock. This thought is sung by many in the verses of the blessed Ambrose, who says of the cock, that "when it crew the Rock of the Church deplored his fault.’ But I know that subsequently I very frequently adopted this sense, that when the Lord said, ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,’ he meant by this rock, the one which Peter had confessed in saying, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son, of the living God;’ so that Peter, called by the name of this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon that rock, and which has received the keys of the kingdom of heaven.

“In fact, it was not said to him, Thou art the rock; but thou art Peter. The rock was Christ. Peter having confessed him as all the Church confesses him, he was called Peter. Between these two sentiments, let the reader choose the most probable.”

Father, I never dreamed you were a fan of St. Augustine!!!

 

[Subrosa]

Correction on the link to Homily 88 on John 22:15…

ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf114.iv.xc.html

By mistake you put the same url for for Homily VI in the two links…

Love the Early Church Fathers…

God bless

Thanks!

 

[Subrosa]

Now to look at what he has to say of Saint John the Divine. He gives to John the keys which some believe are restricted to Peter - but this was not the belief of the early Catholic Church of which Saint John Chrysostom is a shining example.

“For the son of thunder, the beloved of Christ,** the pillar of the Churches throughout the world, who holds the keys of heaven,** who drank the cup of Christ, and was baptized with His baptism, who lay upon his Master’s bosom with much confidence, this man comes forward to us now…. By this Apostle stand the powers from above, marveling at the beauty of his soul, and his understanding, and the bloom of that virtue by which he drew unto him Christ Himself, and obtained the grace of the Spirit. For he hath made ready his soul, as some well-fashioned and jeweled lyre with strings of gold, and yielded it for the utterance of something great and sublime to the Spirit” (St. John Chrysostom, First Homily on the Gospel of St. John).

“Were John about to converse with us, and to say to us words of his own, we needs must describe his family, his country, and his education. But since it is not he, but God by him, that speaks to mankind, it seems to me superfluous and distracting to enquire into these matters. And yet even thus it is not superfluous, but even very necessary. For when you have learned who he was, and from whence, who his parents, and what his character, and then hear his voice and all his heavenly wisdom, then you shall know right well that these (doctrines) belong not to him, but to the Divine power stirring his soul…. Not so this fisherman; for all he saith is infallible; and standing as it were upon a rock, he never shifts his ground. For since he has been thought worthy to be in the most secret places, and has the Lord of all speaking within him, he is subject to nothing that is human” (St. John Chrysostom, Second Homily on the Gospel of St. John). ]

Good day and God bless, Fr. Ambrose -

I think it must be said that in no way, shape or form does the Church established in Rome by St. Peter consider him on par with Jesus. Jesus is the reason for the church’s existence.

Jesus is Lord and Saviour, the cornerstone of our joint and common faith, even with the differences.

And while there was some disagreement by some earlier christians, many, many believe that Peter was appointed chief shepherd of Christ’s flock on earth.

I respect that you do not agree with that particular perspective.

Subrosa