Peter's Seat

[Jesus] said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ The Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” - Matthew 16:15-18

Since we have discussed Peter’s role within the Church in a recent sermon(On This Rock-5/22/22), I thought it might be helpful to try to explain a bit further the difference in the two main understandings of Matthew 16. This is by no means an extensive or conclusive study into the office of Peter, but this should provide a starting point for those who desire to study this topic further.

There is no speaking about Peter without speaking about his Lord. In order for us to fully understand the practice of Peter within the church, local or invisible, we must first discuss what Christ said about the church. For Peter was not informed based on his own understanding or presuppositions, but was molded, taught, and commanded by Christ.

We see Jesus’ initial use of the word ‘church’ in Matthew 16:13-20. Jesus asks his disciples who they say that he is and Peter, being the unofficial mouthpiece for the disciples, stepped forward and declared, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”(Matt. 16:16). This profession is met with blessings from Christ as he declares that upon ‘this rock’ He will build His Church. This brings us to such a significant point of dissension among scholars that it has shaken the very foundations of Christendom. Jesus calls Simon Peter “Πέτρος”, a Greek word meaning rock. The point of disagreement is found in this question: Was Jesus speaking of building His church on Peter the man, or on Peter’s confession of Jesus as Christ? This question may be answered rather simply but the applications, and limitations of those applications, have led to some of the longest standing arguments in all of Church history. Simply put, if Jesus is saying that he is going to build His church only on Peter the man, then there is something significant about this man and the office that he is going to hold as a leader of the Church. The fact that Peter’s title and responsibilities as an Apostle are of incredible importance is not what is in question, but rather to what extent is the Apostleship and leadership of Peter transferred to the people in leadership of the church. Early church fathers very much disagreed with the role of Peter within the church. Jerome(347-420) clearly saw Peter’s seat in the Church as being one of near-infallibility as well as transferable from person to person. While writing to the current leader of the church in Rome, Jerome states:

“Evil children have squandered their patrimony; you alone keep your heritage intact. The fruitful soil of Rome, when it receives the pure seed of the Lord, bears fruit an hundredfold . . . As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built! . . . If you think fit enact a decree; and then I shall not hesitate to speak of three hypostases. Order a new creed to supersede the Nicene; and then, whether we are Arians or orthodox, one confession will do for us all . . . But may the faith of Rome never come to such a pass! May the devout hearts of your people never be infected with such unholy doctrines! Let us be satisfied to speak of one substance and of three subsisting persons–perfect, equal, coeternal. Let us keep to one hypostasis, if such be your pleasure, and say nothing of three.”

Jerome is not alone in this position. There were many others who viewed the seat of Peter as transferable and infallible, yet it seems that this group was the minority. Earlier saints such as Origen(185-254),Chrysostom (349-407), and Augustine(354-430) did not see it that way. There is error to be found in placing an over emphasis on Peter the man. We know from other New Testament writings that Peter was prone to rashness(John 18:10-11), cowardice(Matt. 26:69-75), and prejudice(Gal. 2:11-14). Therefore it would seem unfitting that an infallible office should descend from a fallible man. 

Others would take the passage in Matthew 16 to mean that Jesus would build His Church on the confession that Jesus is the Christ. This appears to be Origen’s understanding of Matthew 16 as he wrote:

For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, add the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.

True enough is his understanding of this text to lead us to what I think is a proper reading in light of Peter and his ministry. The key found in the selection from Origen above comes in the phrase “add the polity in accordance with it…” We can observe from Peter as we continue to read his writings later in the new testament that Peter himself does not agree with the idea of “Peter’s Seat”. Instead he adheres to a more historically biblical position on leadership. He considered himself no better than the elders of the churches in Asia Minor. He calls himself a fellow elder and a partaker in the glory of God(1 Peter 5:1). There is no indication that Peter considered himself to be utterly set apart in terms of responsibility and infallibility. He was called out by the Lord Jesus as a disciple, and was set apart as an Apostle by the Holy Spirit, but his actions that he calls us to, or exemplified himself, was that of every Christian: build your life and ministry on the bedrock truth of “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”. This is indeed the core truth upon which all of the Christian life hinges. If we are to start anywhere in attempting to understand Peter and how he saw his role within the Church, we must first look there.

There is a balance, however, when we begin to think of the polarity of these two readings(Peter as Rock; Peter’s confession as Rock) of Matthew 16. The danger is not seeing that they share center stage as necessary components. A strictly Roman Catholic reading would see Peter as an infallible mouthpiece of God , whose office and title has been transferred through the reign of the papacy. A strictly confessional reading would see a person have a tendency to have an aversion to authority and develop a kind of “me and Jesus” mentality. Both of these overreactions should be avoided entirely.

Yes, Jesus only builds his church upon those that have the resounding profession that He is the Christ. And yet, he also uses men in offices of authority to accomplish the building. These two truths work in harmonious, humble majesty as God continues to build His church in Christ for His Glory.