Was Peter the 'Rock' on which the Church was Built?
James Mullin
May 19, 2006
Half way through the biblical account called Acts of the Apostles, Simon Peter disappears for good.
To find out more about him, I consulted Lives of the Popes by Richard P. McBrien. McBrien is the author of Catholics, the general editor of the Encyclopedia of Catholicism, and a professor of theology at the University of Notre Dame.
The very first sentence in Part I of "Lives" states: “Although Catholic tradition, beginning in the late second and early third centuries, regards St. Peter as the first Bishop of Rome and therefore, as the first pope, there is no evidence that Peter was involved in the initial establishment of the Christian community in Rome (indeed what evidence there is would seem to point in the opposite direction) or that he serves as Rome’s first bishop…Peter did become identified in tradition as the first Bishop of Rome. But tradition is not a fact factory. It cannot make something into a historical fact when it is not.”
According to Professor McBrien, there is “no evidence” that Rome even had a diocese with one bishop as its pastoral head until the middle of the second century.
St. Ignatius of Antioch, a strong believer in the primacy of Rome, wrote a letter to the Church at Rome shortly before he was martyred in 107 AD, and it is the only one of his letters to the seven churches of the Mediterranean world that makes no mention at all of a local bishop!
St. Jerome, who died three centuries later in 420 AD, claimed that Pope Clement I was consecrated by St. Peter himself as his immediate successor. McBrien says, “If that were true, Pope Linus and Pope Anacletus would have to be displaced from or rearranged on the list of popes.”
Christianity says Peter visited Antioch and possibly Cornith, “But as far as Rome is concerned, we read nothing anywhere in the New Testament in connection with Peter. And above all, there is not even a hint of a specific successor to Peter.”
Can this be the “rock” upon which the Catholic Church was built?
According to Lives of the Popes, the first pope to have used Matthew 16:18 (“Thou art Peter, and upon the rock I will build my church…”) as the basis of Roman primacy was Pope Stephen I. (papacy: 245-57) If we are to understand this verse, we need to read the entire passage:
When Jesus came unto the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples: Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (13:19)
The Roman Catholic view is that the “rock” is Peter himself. An alternate view is that Peter’s confession of belief in Jesus as ‘Christ, the Son of the living God’ is the rock. This belief is the basis of Peter’s strength, but it is not unique to him; it is shared by all the apostles.
Another interpretation is that the rock upon which Jesus will build his church is Jesus himself – God’s chosen cornerstone and a rock upon which mankind will stumble.
In Matthew 21:42-44 Jesus says: “”Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes? Therefore I say unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind them to powder.”
In Acts 4:8-11, when Peter and John are in the temple in Jerusalem preaching “through Jesus the resurrection of the dead”, they are confronted by the Sadducees and taken before the high priest, who asks them by what power they do this. Peter, “filled with the Holy Ghost” answers them:
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at naught by you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”
Can there be any doubt that Peter himself names Jesus as the cornerstone - the ‘rock’ upon which the new church is built?
This is also the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy found in Psalm 118:22-24: “The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. This is the Lord’s doing; it is marvelous in our eyes. This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.” It also fulfills Isaiah 28:16: “Behold I lay in Zion a stone for a foundation. A tried stone, a precious cornerstone.”
Paul also testifies that Jesus is the foundation stone. To new disciples gathered together he says: “Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.” Corinthians, (2:19,20)
In the First Epistle of Peter, all of these references to Jesus as the cornerstone are finally brought together. Jesus is described as “a living cornerstone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God and precious…Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner stone…the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner. And a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word…” (Peter 2:4-8)
If we believe in the fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah, in Psalm 118, in the words of Jesus Christ, in In Acts of the Apostles, in the Epistle of Peter and of Paul, then we must admit that Jesus is the rock and the cornerstone on which the Christian Church is built.
Are Peter’s epistles a theological foundation stone on which the church may rest?
Eerdman’s Bible Dictionary goes so far as to say that, “the theology of Peter cannot be reconstructed.” The Catholic Study Bible, says: “Among modern scholars there is wide agreement that 2 Peter (second epistle) is a pseudonymous work, i.e., one written by a later author who attributed it to Peter…many think it is the latest work in the NT and assign it to the first or even the second quarter of the second century
Compare Peter’s single credited epistle to the written works of Paul, who authored long letters to the Romans, Corinthians (I & II), Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians (I & II), Timothy (I & II), Titus, Philomon, and Hebrews. That makes 14 epistles in all. In addition, Paul is the primary subject of Acts of the Apostles. Aside from the life and words of Jesus Christ, the theological foundation of the Christian Church is to be found in Paul, not Peter.
Paul did not treat Peter as his superior, or even his equal. At one point, he severely rebuked Peter because he would not eat with the Gentiles: “But when Peter came to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed…and I said unto Peter before them all, If thou being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compelest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?” (Galatians 3:11-14)
Jesus also rebuked him. When Peter tried to walk to Jesus on the water, he began to sink. Jesus caught him, saying: “O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?” (Matthew 14: 28-31)
And when Jesus told his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and be killed and raised on the third day, Peter said: “Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.” But Jesus said to Peter: “Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offense unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.”
And finally, when Jesus was praying in the Garden of Gethsemane, he found his disciples sleeping. He woke Peter, saying: “What, could ye not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation; The spirit indeed is willing but the flesh is weak.”
Peter is not the “rock” on which the Christian Church was built, nor was he its chief theologian, or even the first Bishop of Rome.
He was an ordinary fisherman chosen by the Lord to be a “fisher of men”. At times he lost his faith, and even denied his Lord, but he still went on to bravely testify that Jesus is the Messiah, even in the temple of Herod. So be it.
To find out more about him, I consulted Lives of the Popes by Richard P. McBrien. McBrien is the author of Catholics, the general editor of the Encyclopedia of Catholicism, and a professor of theology at the University of Notre Dame.
The very first sentence in Part I of "Lives" states: “Although Catholic tradition, beginning in the late second and early third centuries, regards St. Peter as the first Bishop of Rome and therefore, as the first pope, there is no evidence that Peter was involved in the initial establishment of the Christian community in Rome (indeed what evidence there is would seem to point in the opposite direction) or that he serves as Rome’s first bishop…Peter did become identified in tradition as the first Bishop of Rome. But tradition is not a fact factory. It cannot make something into a historical fact when it is not.”
According to Professor McBrien, there is “no evidence” that Rome even had a diocese with one bishop as its pastoral head until the middle of the second century.
St. Ignatius of Antioch, a strong believer in the primacy of Rome, wrote a letter to the Church at Rome shortly before he was martyred in 107 AD, and it is the only one of his letters to the seven churches of the Mediterranean world that makes no mention at all of a local bishop!
St. Jerome, who died three centuries later in 420 AD, claimed that Pope Clement I was consecrated by St. Peter himself as his immediate successor. McBrien says, “If that were true, Pope Linus and Pope Anacletus would have to be displaced from or rearranged on the list of popes.”
Christianity says Peter visited Antioch and possibly Cornith, “But as far as Rome is concerned, we read nothing anywhere in the New Testament in connection with Peter. And above all, there is not even a hint of a specific successor to Peter.”
Can this be the “rock” upon which the Catholic Church was built?
According to Lives of the Popes, the first pope to have used Matthew 16:18 (“Thou art Peter, and upon the rock I will build my church…”) as the basis of Roman primacy was Pope Stephen I. (papacy: 245-57) If we are to understand this verse, we need to read the entire passage:
When Jesus came unto the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples: Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (13:19)
The Roman Catholic view is that the “rock” is Peter himself. An alternate view is that Peter’s confession of belief in Jesus as ‘Christ, the Son of the living God’ is the rock. This belief is the basis of Peter’s strength, but it is not unique to him; it is shared by all the apostles.
Another interpretation is that the rock upon which Jesus will build his church is Jesus himself – God’s chosen cornerstone and a rock upon which mankind will stumble.
In Matthew 21:42-44 Jesus says: “”Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes? Therefore I say unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind them to powder.”
In Acts 4:8-11, when Peter and John are in the temple in Jerusalem preaching “through Jesus the resurrection of the dead”, they are confronted by the Sadducees and taken before the high priest, who asks them by what power they do this. Peter, “filled with the Holy Ghost” answers them:
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at naught by you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”
Can there be any doubt that Peter himself names Jesus as the cornerstone - the ‘rock’ upon which the new church is built?
This is also the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy found in Psalm 118:22-24: “The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. This is the Lord’s doing; it is marvelous in our eyes. This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.” It also fulfills Isaiah 28:16: “Behold I lay in Zion a stone for a foundation. A tried stone, a precious cornerstone.”
Paul also testifies that Jesus is the foundation stone. To new disciples gathered together he says: “Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.” Corinthians, (2:19,20)
In the First Epistle of Peter, all of these references to Jesus as the cornerstone are finally brought together. Jesus is described as “a living cornerstone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God and precious…Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner stone…the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner. And a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word…” (Peter 2:4-8)
If we believe in the fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah, in Psalm 118, in the words of Jesus Christ, in In Acts of the Apostles, in the Epistle of Peter and of Paul, then we must admit that Jesus is the rock and the cornerstone on which the Christian Church is built.
Are Peter’s epistles a theological foundation stone on which the church may rest?
Eerdman’s Bible Dictionary goes so far as to say that, “the theology of Peter cannot be reconstructed.” The Catholic Study Bible, says: “Among modern scholars there is wide agreement that 2 Peter (second epistle) is a pseudonymous work, i.e., one written by a later author who attributed it to Peter…many think it is the latest work in the NT and assign it to the first or even the second quarter of the second century
Compare Peter’s single credited epistle to the written works of Paul, who authored long letters to the Romans, Corinthians (I & II), Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians (I & II), Timothy (I & II), Titus, Philomon, and Hebrews. That makes 14 epistles in all. In addition, Paul is the primary subject of Acts of the Apostles. Aside from the life and words of Jesus Christ, the theological foundation of the Christian Church is to be found in Paul, not Peter.
Paul did not treat Peter as his superior, or even his equal. At one point, he severely rebuked Peter because he would not eat with the Gentiles: “But when Peter came to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed…and I said unto Peter before them all, If thou being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compelest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?” (Galatians 3:11-14)
Jesus also rebuked him. When Peter tried to walk to Jesus on the water, he began to sink. Jesus caught him, saying: “O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?” (Matthew 14: 28-31)
And when Jesus told his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and be killed and raised on the third day, Peter said: “Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.” But Jesus said to Peter: “Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offense unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.”
And finally, when Jesus was praying in the Garden of Gethsemane, he found his disciples sleeping. He woke Peter, saying: “What, could ye not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation; The spirit indeed is willing but the flesh is weak.”
Peter is not the “rock” on which the Christian Church was built, nor was he its chief theologian, or even the first Bishop of Rome.
He was an ordinary fisherman chosen by the Lord to be a “fisher of men”. At times he lost his faith, and even denied his Lord, but he still went on to bravely testify that Jesus is the Messiah, even in the temple of Herod. So be it.