“But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.” –Galatians 2:11

Matthew 16:18-19, Luke 22:32, and John 21:15-17

Argument:

           The Roman Catholic Church uses a number of passages to support the primacy and infallibility of the Pope.  The ones that are most frequently are Matthew 16:18-19, Luke 22:32, and John 21:15-17.  It is believed by Roman Catholics that Peter was the first bishop of Rome and that his primacy and infallibility were passed on to his successors, the Popes. 

Response:

           These passages will be taken in turn:

Matthew 16:18-19

“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

“Rock”:

1. First, even if one were to concede that Peter is the ‘rock’ of v.18, this would still not prove infallibility.  As Eric Svendsen rightly put it:

“Can Peter and the other apostles be a foundation without being infallible?  That seems to be self evident. Foundations do not necessarily require infallibility, and it is a leap of logic to suggest otherwise.” -Eric Svendsen, Evangelical Answers (Lindenhurst, New York: Reformation Press, 1999), p.19.

2.  Second, where does it say that what applies to Peter here also applies to his successors?  No such statement can be found.  Even if Peter was granted infallibility (and to an extant, he was: in writing Scripture), this does not necessitate the passing on of this gift.

3.  The point of the passage (v.13-20) was that Jesus is the Messiah.  Any interpretation of this passage that diverges from this point actually misses the point.  Just two verses before “upon this rock” was spoken, Peter said, “You are the Christ the Son of the living God.” Thus, what is more likely is that the “rock” of v.18 is Peter’s confession of Christ.

4.  James White notes the grammar used in this passage:

“The rock of which the Lord speaks is that common confession made by all who are part of the Church: Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.  This is seen, I believe, in the fact that while the Lord is addressing Peter directly, He changes from direct address to the third person, “this rock,” when speaking of Peter’s confession.  He does not say, “Upon you, Peter, I will build my church.”  Instead, you have a clear distinction between Peter, the…(Petros), and the demonstrative pronoun preceding…(petra), the confession of faith, on which the church is built.” -James R. White, The Roman Catholic Controversy (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 1996), p.118.

Some Roman Catholics may reply that the Lord Jesus likely spoke these words in Aramaic which would eliminate the distinction between Petros and petra in v.18.  However, there is no such Aramaic Gospel of Matthew in existence, and from all the textual evidence that we have, the entirety of the New Testament was originally written in Greek.  Thus, the inspired (‘God-breathed’) text is the one that we read now, and under this inspiration, Matthew chose to place the word distinction that James White has noted above.   

5.  Identification of the “rock” in v.18 as Peter was the minority view in the early church.  This means that the Roman Catholic interpretation of this passage goes against the ‘unanimous consent of the fathers’.  For the documentation of all relevant quotes, go here:  http://www.christiantruth.com/fathersmt16.html

“The gates of Hades will…”:

6.  It is asserted that this means that the Church will never fall into error.  However, gates are used for defensive purposes, not offensive.  So, the passage is saying that Hell’s defenses will not be able to withstand Christ’s Church’s assault.  So, what is the meaning of this phrase?  It is that the Gospel will overpower Satan’s hold on men and bring souls out of the Kingdom of Hell and into the Kingdom of Heaven.

“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven…bind…bound…”:

7. Does this passage prove infallibility?  Eric Svendsen explains the Roman eisegesis of this passage:

“At best, all it could suggest is that the pope has the power to forgive sins.  There is certainly no hint of infallibility here.” -Eric Svendsen, Evangelical Answers (Lindenhurst, New York: Reformation Press, 1999), p.19.

So, what does the passage really mean? 

“The Greek words translated here respectively as “shall be bound” and “shall be loosed” are dedemenon…and lelumenon…Both are future periphrastic perfect participles, which simply means that the action, though future, is prior to the binding and loosing that Peter will do. A more literal translation of this passage would look like this:

            “Whatever you may bind on earth shall already have been bound in

heaven, and whatever you may loose on earth shall already have been loosed in heaven.”

So, far from teaching Peter’s infallibility to define dogma (much less, sacerdotalism), this passage teaches that Peter (and the other apostles according to Matthew 18:19) will be (unwittingly) carrying out what has already been sovereignly decreed in heaven…the binding referred to here is nothing more (or less) than a declarative authority that one’s sins are forgiven.  This authority is inherent in the gospel message itself.” -Eric Svendsen, Evangelical Answers (Lindenhurst, New York: Reformation Press, 1999), p.19-20.

Luke 22:31-32

“Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat; but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.” -Luke 22:31-32

“…prayed…that your faith may not fail.”:

1.  This passage is used to support papal infallibility.  Roman Catholics assume that ‘faith’ here means ‘belief system’.  However, given the context, it means that Peter’s personal trust in Christ during trials of hardship would not fail (v.28).  Just two verses after, v.34, Jesus speaks of Peter’s triple denial of Christ during Christ’s trial.  In v.32, it says, “…and you, once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers” (emphasis mine).  So, clearly in context, v.32 refers to a perseverance of Peter’s faith rather than infallibility.

2.  Even if this refers to infallibility (which, from the context, it obviously does not), where does it say that Peter’s successors would also have infallibility?  Such a statement is nowhere to be found!

John 21:15-17

So when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Tend My lambs.”  He said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Shepherd My sheep.” He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus said to him, “Tend My sheep.” -John 21:15-17

“Tend my sheep.”:

1.  The Roman Catholic assumes that Christ is giving this authority to Peter only.  Even if one were to accept this assertion, the passage says nothing about passing the primacy on to Peter’s ‘successors’.

2. Augustine, one of the church fathers, gives us not only the early church’s view of this passage but also the most logical and obvious interpretation:

“But first the Lord asks what He knew, and that not once, but a second and a third time, whether Peter loved Him; and just as often He has the same answer, that He is loved, while just as often He gives Peter the same charge to feed His sheep. To the threefold denial there is now appended a threefold confession, that his tongue may not yield a feebler service to love than to fear, and imminent death may not appear to have elicited more from the lips than present life. Let it be the office of love to feed the Lord's flock, if it was the signal of fear to deny the Shepherd.”

           -Augustine, Tractates on John, Tractate CXXIII, part 5

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF1-07/npnf1-07-128.htm#P3871_2129506

James White comments on this passage:

“Here we have the gracious Lord restoring the Apostle who, in his brash impetuosity, had promised to follow Him even to death yet had denied Him three times.  The threefold question of Peter, followed by the command to feed or shepherd Christ’s sheep, is restorative in nature.  Nothing in the passage even begins to suggest that Jesus’ words mean that the other Apostles were not likewise commissioned to feed and pastor Christ’s flock on an equal basis with Simon Peter.  There is no indication that only Peter is told to Shepard God’s flock.” -James R. White, The Roman Catholic Controversy (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 1996), p.114.

Roman Catholicism Index