Why Not St. Simon Peter?

[JMJ4me]

I’ve wondered this for a while- after Jesus changed St. Peter’s name from Simon to Peter, the Gospels refer to him as Simon Peter, right? (correct me if I’m wrong). Why do we call him just St. Peter, while in the Bible it refers to him as Simon Peter?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Probably because there is already another Apostle named Simon, and it’s easier to call Peter just “Peter” to avoid confusing the two.

It’s bad enough that there are two Apostles named “James” so you have to have James the Great and James the Less, which always sounds a bit disrespectful to James the Less even though I know it is referring to their respective ages.

 

[joeybaggz]

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t there another apostle called Simon - Simon the Zealot. Probably so as not to confuse the two.

 

[JMJ4me]

Oh, thanks. That makes a lot of sense. I’m wondering why they didn’t refer to him as just Peter in the Bible, but I don’t think anyone would know the answers to that haha

 

[BartholomewB]

I’m wondering why they didn’t refer to him as just Peter in the Bible, but I don’t think anyone would know the answers to that haha

It is incorrect to state that “they didn’t refer to him as just Peter in the Bible.” In Acts alone, Peter is mentioned fifty-something times. Two or three times, in Chapters 10 and 11, he is described as “Simon who is also called Peter” or (depending on the translation) “Simon who is surnamed Peter.” Every other time he is named as just plain “Peter.”

 

[JMJ4me]

Oh… thanks for the explanation, I guess I’m just used to hearing Simon Peter in the Gospels during Mass