Rejection of the Pope

Michie · Saturday at 9:18 AM

Some Protestants drum up a conflict of authority between Paul and Peter. But there's nothing there.

Does Paul reject the idea that Peter was the first pope? Some Christians think so, especially in Galatians 2:6. Paul writes,

And from those who were reputed to be something (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—those, I say, who were of repute added nothing to me.

It would seem Paul is asserting an equal authority with Peter and thereby rejecting the idea that Peter is of a higher rank. Protestant apologist Jason Engwer from triablogue reads it this way, and he appealed to it in a 1999 debate with Mark Bonocore:

Paul asserted his equality with, not his superiority to, the other apostles ( . . . Gal. 2:6-8). Paul was not a pope, nor was Peter or any other apostle. It is the express testimony of Paul that what Peter and other prominent church leaders were meant nothing to him. . . . The equality and independence of Paul are a contradiction of the doctrine of the papacy.

So does Galatians 2:6 prove that Paul didn’t see Peter as having a higher rank of authority? No, it doesn’t!

First, the argument assumes that Peter’s authority meant nothing to Paul. But that’s not the case. What meant nothing to Paul was the high esteem Peter (along with James and John) was held in by the Christians in Galatia. As Evangelical Richard N. Longnecker writes in his book Galatians,

Continued below.