I received some comments on my previous post about the dogma of papal infallibility and promised to expand on the topic of the papacy. First, in my previous post, I questioned the dogma of papal infallibility itself, and I still believe that’s correct. But let’s take a closer look at the papacy itself and what is written in Holy Scripture, which is considered the foundation for this institution/office.
In Matthew, chapter 16, verse 18, we read: „And I say to you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church.” Let’s turn to the original languages, noting that the books of the New Testament were written in Koine Greek, not ordinary Greek. Which is significant? In the original, we have petros and petra. From ordinary Greek, they mean „pebble” and „rock,” respectively. However, looking at Koine Greek, Petros is a proper name in the masculine form, while petra is the noun „rock.” Unless Jesus said: „You are Petra,” but then the name would be feminine, and therefore addressed to a woman. Unless we accept this translation, only then women were significantly exalted, which would ultimately be consistent with Christ’s teaching, though the Church would have a real problem with it.
What does this quote tell us? First, that Peter, or Petrine, as you prefer, is distinguished from among the disciples. He receives a new name, which in the Bible always has significant meaning and always indicates some mission. I associate it with some foundational function, but it’s not yet the papacy as we understand it today, and it’s far from it. From this, one cannot simply derive the pope and his succession, Rome as the capital, the structure of offices, or the model of power. One cannot derive the papacy as we know it today from this.
This text does not say that Peter is infallible, that his authority is absolute, that his office is hereditary, or that the other apostles are subordinate to him and must obey him. Moreover, already in Matthew 18:18, the same power to „bind and loose” is given to all the apostles. Later, in Galatians chapter 2, Paul publicly opposes Peter. And at the Council of Jerusalem, described in Acts chapter 15, Peter neither presides nor pronounces decisions alone. This is completely unlike the papacy we know from our time, or even earlier.
What do we know next? Jesus did not leave a church constitution, did not describe offices (and those that existed, he stigmatized more than praised), nor did he create a governance structure. What did he do? He left us the first community of believing disciples, along with the apostles and likely the female apostles, which stems partly from the Bible and partly from contemporary writings that have not been included in the canon (the question is, why shouldn’t we know them? Because they don’t suit the church? – after all, the canon of Scripture is also an arbitrary decision of the pope). Jesus also left us certain practices: teaching, proclaiming the Gospel, baptism, and the breaking of bread, i.e., the Eucharist, and the Spirit, which is to lead us to the whole of truth—us collectively, but equally individually. After all, it was received by individuals, not automatically by everyone.
Church hierarchy appears much later in history as a response to the growth of communities, the recognition of Christianity as the state religion (which caused it considerable harm, but that’s a separate, broad topic), conflicts, heresies, and real organizational problems.
What are the conclusions? Christ distinguished Peter, but the papacy is not necessarily the only development of this distinction and differs significantly from it. First, the early Church was collegial, not monarchical. Second, the primacy of Peter, or today we would call the papacy, was merely honorary, not jurisdictional. The authority of a single bishop over the entire church crystallizes very late, and the history of the papacy itself is often unconventional. Therefore, to say that the matter is obvious and that the papacy is a necessary extension of this quote is an oversimplification. This quote argues that Peter had a special, honorary role. It does not prove that Christ intended the papacy in the form we know it. It is insufficient to logically force the hierarchical, monarchical church we know today.
The next post will further explore this quote.
I create this blog with passion and commitment to providing you with engaging and reliable content. If you think it’s worthwhile, you can buy me a virtual coffee—it’s a small gesture that really helps me continue my work! https://buymeacoffee.com/modernlilith