On Petrine Doctrine

[Young Pilgrim]

Not long ago I was searching for answers to questions I had on the Petrine Doctrine. As I could not find what I considered a thorough or convincing explanation for my questions anywhere, even among the writings of many of the church fathers, I attempted to find an explanation solely in the Bible. By the grace of God, I found the answers I was looking for and subsequently wrote what I deem to be a thorough explanation of what I learned. I would like the answers I found to be easily available to anyone searching for them, so I'm posting them here. I know that what I have written directly contradicts the beliefs of many, and I do not mean to offend anyone. It is my sincere wish that what I have written will help others; I do not wish to stir up petty arguments.



On Petrine Doctrine



“I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven”(Matthew 16:18-19).



On these two verses the Catholic Church has built its doctrine of the papacy. What I find interesting is that if Jesus did give authority over the church to Peter, this passage does not give any support to the idea that such authority should be passed down to Peter’s successors. This idea is drawn from a link between this passage in Matthew and Isaiah 22:15-25, in which the Lord declares in very similar language that He will “set the key of the house of David on his shoulder,” referring to Eliakim the son of Hilkiah. The idea of succession comes directly from verse 24: “So they will hang on him all the glory of his father's house, offspring and issue, all the least of vessels, from bowls to all the jars.” Catholic doctrine sees a correlation between the perceived position given to Peter and office of chief steward of the house of David given to Eliakim.

I can see how some might interpret Matthew 16:18-19 to mean that Jesus would build His church on Peter alone, but I cannot see how one could believe that when the rest of scripture directly contradicts such a notion: “Jesus said to them, “Did you never read in the Scriptures, ‘The stone which the builders rejected, this became the chief corner stone; this came about from the Lord and it is marvelous in our eyes?’” [Speaking of Himself]”(Matthew 21:42). “For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ”(1 Corinthians 3:11). The most clear description of the church as a building is in Ephesians 2:20-21, which states, “having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord…” A direct link can be made from these verses in Ephesians to the verses in Matthew 16. The writer of Ephesians includes the apostles and prophets as part of the foundation of the church when he says “the foundation of the apostles and prophets.” With that said, Matthew 16:18-19 do not contradict the rest of scripture if they are interpreted thus: Peter is a rock of many rocks, the most important and chief rock being Jesus. Upon this rock, and upon all these rocks, Jesus will build His church.

Keeping what I have already said in mind, read 1 Peter 2:4-8 and decide for yourself what these verses mean in light of Petrine Doctrine.



“As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him— you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For in Scripture it says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame." Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, "The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone," and, "A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall." They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for.”

 

[david01]

This is a very find biblical exposition IMO and one worthy of consideration by all Christians.

 

[Rick Otto]

Amen.

 

[williamcobbet]

Not long ago I was searching for answers to questions I had on the Petrine Doctrine. As I could not find what I considered a thorough or convincing explanation for my questions anywhere, even among the writings of many of the church fathers, I attempted to find an explanation solely in the Bible. By the grace of God, I found the answers I was looking for and subsequently wrote what I deem to be a thorough explanation of what I learned. I would like the answers I found to be easily available to anyone searching for them, so I'm posting them here. I know that what I have written directly contradicts the beliefs of many, and I do not mean to offend anyone. It is my sincere wish that what I have written will help others; I do not wish to stir up petty arguments.



On Petrine Doctrine



“I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven”(Matthew 16:18-19).



On these two verses the Catholic Church has built its doctrine of the papacy. What I find interesting is that if Jesus did give authority over the church to Peter, this passage does not give any support to the idea that such authority should be passed down to Peter’s successors. This idea is drawn from a link between this passage in Matthew and Isaiah 22:15-25, in which the Lord declares in very similar language that He will “set the key of the house of David on his shoulder,” referring to Eliakim the son of Hilkiah. The idea of succession comes directly from verse 24: “So they will hang on him all the glory of his father's house, offspring and issue, all the least of vessels, from bowls to all the jars.” Catholic doctrine sees a correlation between the perceived position given to Peter and office of chief steward of the house of David given to Eliakim.

I can see how some might interpret Matthew 16:18-19 to mean that Jesus would build His church on Peter alone, but I cannot see how one could believe that when the rest of scripture directly contradicts such a notion: “Jesus said to them, “Did you never read in the Scriptures, ‘The stone which the builders rejected, this became the chief corner stone; this came about from the Lord and it is marvelous in our eyes?’” [Speaking of Himself]”(Matthew 21:42). “For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ”(1 Corinthians 3:11). The most clear description of the church as a building is in Ephesians 2:20-21, which states, “having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord…” A direct link can be made from these verses in Ephesians to the verses in Matthew 16. The writer of Ephesians includes the apostles and prophets as part of the foundation of the church when he says “the foundation of the apostles and prophets.” With that said, Matthew 16:18-19 do not contradict the rest of scripture if they are interpreted thus: Peter is a rock of many rocks, the most important and chief rock being Jesus. Upon this rock, and upon all these rocks, Jesus will build His church.

Keeping what I have already said in mind, read 1 Peter 2:4-8 and decide for yourself what these verses mean in light of Petrine Doctrine.



“As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him— you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For in Scripture it says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame." Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, "The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone," and, "A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall." They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for.”

Young Pilgrim,
It's commendable that you don't want to start any petty disagreements over your post. To insure yourself of this fact you've attempted to discredit the Roman Catholic papacy. I know that just about any Catholic would be mild mannered in answering your questions.

It is at that period in the history of the Chruch that Jesus has established His Church. The Roman Catholic Church.
Jesus knew that His Church would be around for a long time to come. Til the end of time! So why would he give the running of His Church soley to one man who would soon die? If the Pope would only be concerned about the proper governance of Jesus's Church and not at all be concerned with teaching and guiding the flock, there would still be a need for a person to govern after Peter had died. Someone would have to take over where Peter had died. Then someone would have to take over where the last Pope had died.
We are not talking about a little church at the intersection of First and Broadway. We are speaking about a Church with over one billion members.

We have already observed what happens when a pope is not available. We have 30,000 Protestant Churches.
I could name every Pope from Peter to the present. The Catholic Church is One.

 

[Zeddicus]

I apologize ahead of time for digressing from the topic at hand.

We have already observed what happens when a pope is not available. We have 30,000 Protestant Churches.

I get really tired of hearing that number thrown around. The way Catholics hypocritically love to use that number that is provided by the source it is derived from (World Christian Encyclopedia)as a beating stick against Protestants and then turn around and want to claim that there is one Catholic Church (denominationally speaking) never ceases to amaze me. Even more so when the same source states that the Roman Catholic Church has 242 denominations.

The simple fact is that the particular source tallied the number of denominations on the basis on finding a particular tradition on the number of countries it was found in. So lets say if people of Baptist tradition were found in 150 then Baptists were counted as having 150 total denominations. The actual total for the Baptist heading in the source was 218.

Anyhow, to find anything close to a halfway accurate picture of the number of denominations (as listed in the source) you would actually have to divide the total number of denominations by 238 (since each heading was based on the number of countries polled).

When doing this you find that you have (calculating in round numbers by the subheadings given by the source) :

Orthodoxy has 3 denominations.
Roman Catholicism has 1 denomination.
Anglicanism has 1 denomination.
Protestantism has 38 denominations.
Independent Traditions have 93 denominations.

Now I am not sure how truly accurate those numbers are to the reality of things, but that is what we get when the proper math for the numbers given in the source is done if taking the total numbers provided at face value.

 

[MamaZ]

As we also read in 2 Peter 1
2Pe 1:1 Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:
2Pe 1:2 Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord;
2Pe 1:3 seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence.
2Pe 1:4 For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, in order that by them you might become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust.
2Pe 1:5 Now for this very reason also, applying all diligence, in your faith supply moral excellence, and in your moral excellence, knowledge;
2Pe 1:6 and in your knowledge, self-control, and in your self-control, perseverance, and in your perseverance, godliness;
2Pe 1:7 and in your godliness, brotherly kindness, and in your brotherly kindness, love.
2Pe 1:8 For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they render you neither useless nor unfruitful in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2Pe 1:9 For he who lacks these qualities is blind or short-sighted, having forgotten his purification from his former sins.
2Pe 1:10 Therefore, brethren, be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you; for as long as you practice these things, you will never stumble;
2Pe 1:11 for in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you.
2Pe 1:12 Therefore, I shall always be ready to remind you of these things, even though you already know them, and have been established in the truth which is present with you.
2Pe 1:13 And I consider it right, as long as I am in this earthly dwelling, to stir you up by way of reminder,
2Pe 1:14 knowing that the laying aside of my earthly dwelling is imminent, as also our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me.
2Pe 1:15 And I will also be diligent that at any time after my departure you may be able to call these things to mind.
2Pe 1:16 For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty.
2Pe 1:17 For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, such an utterance as this was made to Him by the Majestic Glory, "This is My beloved Son with whom I am well-pleased"--
2Pe 1:18 and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.
2Pe 1:19 And so we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.
2Pe 1:20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,
2Pe 1:21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

 

[chestertonrules]

On Petrine Doctrine



“I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven”(Matthew 16:18-19).



On these two verses the Catholic Church has built its doctrine of the papacy. What I find interesting is that if Jesus did give authority over the church to Peter, this passage does not give any support to the idea that such authority should be passed down to Peter’s successors. This idea is drawn from a link between this passage in Matthew and Isaiah 22:15-25, in which the Lord declares in very similar language that He will “set the key of the house of David on his shoulder,” referring to Eliakim the son of Hilkiah. The idea of succession comes directly from verse 24: “So they will hang on him all the glory of his father's house, offspring and issue, all the least of vessels, from bowls to all the jars.” Catholic doctrine sees a correlation between the perceived position given to Peter and office of chief steward of the house of David given to Eliakim.



We know that this is how the early church interpreted this passage.

We know that the first decision placed before the Church, (necessity of circumcision for gentiles) was decided by Peter based on direct revelation from God.

We know that Jesus told Peter three times to feed his sheep.