Concerning John 21, even R. Brown denied that this establish that Peter was the Pope.
Not that you care, but the IVP Commentary says,
“These texts also should speak to some Roman Catholic concepts of Peter and the role of shepherding. Stählin argues that the three questions reflect a liturgical pattern leading to the establishment of Peter’s pastoral ministry,
167 but this notion surely has to be read into the text, as Beasley-Murray has correctly noted.
168%between%
But more to the point is the fact that Vatican I in its concern for the papacy quoted these three verses together with Matt 16:16–19 in making its dogmatic statement that “Peter the Apostle was constituted by Christ the Lord as chief of all the apostles and as visible head of the Church on earth.”
169 As a result of this statement many other comments have since been made by Roman Catholic scholars. Among them Lapide’s declaration is worthy of note. He opines that “on his departure into heaven Christ here designates his Vicar upon earth and creates Peter the Supreme Pontiff, in order that one Church may be governed by one Pastor.”
170 The concept of the pastor/shepherd in this type of argument is rooted in the idea of the shepherd king like David who was a ruler over Israel (cf. 2 Sam 5:2). The question, of course, that can be raised is whether that is the meaning of the present text. But this commentary is hardly the format to discuss the papacy or whether whatever might be implied concerning Peter applies to those who claim to be his successors.
Fortunately, current biblical scholars on both sides of the papacy issue have become a little more irenic than those of previous eras.
171 Brown, for example, who was a revered member of the Pontifical Council before his death, not only argued that Peter’s authority was hardly absolute
172 but he clearly disagreed with those who considered that these three verses meant that Peter was “made shepherd over the other disciples or over the other members of the Twelve.”
173”
167 See
TDNT 9.134.
168 See Beasley-Murray,
John, 405.
1
69 See
Enchiridion Symbolorum, 3053–55.
170 See C. Lapide cited in Hoskyns and Davey,
The Fourth Gospel, 557.
171 The acidic remarks of Lagrange (
Saint Jean, 528–30), who attacked Protestants as narrow and out of touch, are probably no more acidic than many Protestant pulpiteers who consider the Roman Catholics unbiblical.
172 See Brown,
John, 2.1115.
173 Ibid., 2.1116.
174 Bultmann does not consider that Peter needed to be reinstated or rehabilitated (
John, 551).
%between%Borchert, G. L. (2002).
Vol. 25B:
John 12-21. The new American commentary, New International Version (Page 336). Nashville: Broadman & Holman.
e
##
)