Apologeticae sive Theologiae Fundamentalis, Tomus II (Pars Altera): Demonstratio Catholica

That the primacy was conferred upon Peter already stands beyond doubt from the promise of this privilege. For whatever Christ, divine fidelity and truth, promised, he fulfilled in its own time. Therefore he certainly at length conferred upon Peter the primacy of jurisdiction that had been promised, even if perhaps the Gospel recorded nothing of this kind. But indeed the Gospel expressly relates that, when and how Peter obtained the promised dignity.

After his resurrection, namely, the Lord appeared to seven disciples at the sea of Tiberias, ate with them, and then constituted Peter his vicar. This event St. John, an eyewitness and earwitness, narrates as follows:

"When therefore they had breakfasted, Jesus says to Simon Peter: Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these (πλέον τούτων)? He says to him: Yes, Lord, you know that I love you. He says to him: Feed my lambs (βόσκε τὰ ἀρνία μου). He says to him again: Simon, son of John, do you love me? He says to him: Yes, Lord, you know that I love you. He says to him: Feed my lambs (ποίμαινε τὰ πρόβατά [al. πρόβατά] μου). He says 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. He said to him: Feed my sheep (βόσκε τὰ πρόβατά [al. πρόβατά] μου)."¹

It escapes no one that the pastoral office was conferred by these words. But in order that the force of the words may be fully weighed, three things can be asked, namely: on whom, what, and over whom Christ conferred the pastoral office?

1. On whom did Christ confer the pastoral office: Answer: on Peter alone, so that the conferred prerogative is not common to several apostles, but is Peter's own. For Peter is with emphasis described as an individual person, in the singular number and with his name, surname, and father's name expressed: "He says to Simon Peter: Simon, son of John, do you love me? … Simon, son of John, do you love me? … Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter is distinguished from the rest, since his love rather than that of the other apostles is three times sought out and manifested; since he himself, reminded of and conscious of his threefold denial, is grieved at the third interrogation; since in the context he is shown as about to be crucified and is commanded to follow Christ before the others.² Finally Peter is set over against the others: "Do you love me more than these (ἀγαπᾷς με πλέον τούτων)?" Some absurdly maintain that Jesus asked: "Do you love me more than these," namely, fellow disciples. Such a question would have been wholly useless, since Christ demands superhuman love from all men,³ and since Peter would undoubtedly have had at least this minimal love, so as to love the Master more than the disciples. Not content, however, with this love, Christ demands to be loved more by Peter, because he had previously been denied by him and because he now wished to confer a greater dignity upon him. Therefore it is a question of Peter's individual dignity. But what is that dignity, namely:

2. What pastoral office did Christ confer? According to the Greek text Christ commands Peter: "βόσκε … ποίμαινε … βόσκε …" Which the Latin Vulgate renders with one word repeated three times: "Pasce … Pasce … Pasce." And indeed rightly. For although the verb ποιμαίνειν chiefly means "to lead or rule the flock," while the verb βόσκειν rather means "to procure pasture or nourishment for the flock," both nevertheless simply contain the office of feeding the flock. But by the name of feeding the flock in this place, as is evident, is not understood the irrational flock or the one properly so called, but Christ's rational flock, or the one so called metaphorically. But the very metaphor of feeding the rational flock, both from its own nature and from usage of speech, designates the office of exercising jurisdiction or governance over subject men.

By its nature the metaphor of feeding the rational flock signifies jurisdiction or authority to be exercised over subject men, so that the pastor of men is the same as one holding supreme authority. For in this consists the third point of comparison between feeding one's own or irrational flock and the improper or rational flock: just as the shepherd not only procures pasture for the sheep, but leads and brings back the sheep, watches over the sheep, defends them from the attack of wolves and other dangers, and recalls the wandering ones to the fold, so the shepherd of the rational flock is bound to direct, rule, defend, and spiritually nourish subject men. But this he attains only by the exercise of social authority. Therefore Peter possesses social authority over the flock of the faithful, because it was said to him: "Feed my sheep." The metaphor of feeding has the same signification from:

From profane and biblical usage of speech. Among Homer and other Greek authors the princes of peoples are wont generally to be called ποιμένες λαῶν. Similarly in the holy Scriptures by the word "feeding" (Greek ποιμαίνειν, Hebrew raah) the act of royal power is expressed; by the word "shepherd" (Greek ποιμήν, Hebrew roeh) the person of a leader, a prince, a king. Thus Ier 23, 1. 2: "Woe to the shepherds, who destroy and tear apart the flock of my pasture, says the Lord. Therefore thus says the Lord God of Israel to the shepherds who feed my people: You have scattered my flock and driven them out and have not visited them: behold, I will visit upon you the malice of your pursuits, says the Lord." Especially David, the greatest of the kings of Israel, is again called shepherd.⁴ Indeed in the Old Testament the king Messiah⁵ and God the Savior⁶ come under the name of shepherd. In the New Testament, however, our Lord Jesus Christ is described as the shepherd of the faithful by the mouth of the apostles⁷ and also by his own mouth.⁸ If, therefore, Christ constituted Peter the shepherd of the faithful, he undoubtedly constituted him his vicar in ruling the ecclesiastical society. From this the answer to the third question already almost becomes clear:

3. Over whom did Christ confer the pastoral office: For the obvious sense of the text is that Peter is set as supreme shepherd over the whole Church of Christ. For he is commanded to feed both the lambs and the sheep⁹ of Christ, with no exception made, indeed with the possessive pronoun added: "Feed my lambs … Feed my sheep." Most think that by the name of lambs the simple faithful are described, but by the name of sheep, inasmuch as they are the mothers of the lambs, the hierarchs or clerics inferior to Peter; others understand by the name of lambs the imperfect faithful, by the name of sheep the perfect faithful; others take lambs and sheep synonymously. But whichever interpretation at length fits, it is evident that by the very enumeration of the parts the whole flock is signified. A fortiori this holds when the possessive pronoun meos, meas is considered. For by the force of this pronoun all are assigned to Peter to feed, to whom that pronoun extends, i. e. all who are lambs and sheep of Christ, Peter himself alone excepted. Therefore Peter is constituted shepherd of the whole fold of Christ, or the primate of the universal Church, the apostles also included.

Thus indeed Christian antiquity always understood these words of Christ in this way. E. g. Origen says that to Peter "the supreme charge of the feeding of the sheep" was handed over.¹⁰ Ephraem syr.: "The Lord entrusted to [Simon] his flock, the sheep, the lambs, and the little sheep."¹¹ Ambrosius: Peter "is preferred to all … and now is commanded to feed not lambs, as at first, to be nourished with a certain milk, nor little sheep, as at second, but sheep, the more perfect, so that, being more perfect, he might govern."¹² Leo M.: "From the whole world one Peter is chosen, who is to be placed over the calling of all nations and over all the apostles and all the pastors of the Church, so that, although in the people of God there are many priests and many pastors, Peter nevertheless properly rules all those whom Christ also rules principally."¹³

Hence certain adversaries wrongly object against the words Io 21, 15-17 that Christ restored to Peter only the apostolic dignity lost by the threefold denial. For they gratuitously contend that Peter fell from the apostleship by his denial. But even if he had fallen, the apostleship would already have been restored to him, because he had received apostolic order and jurisdiction together with the other apostles after the resurrection.¹⁴ But besides this power, which Peter had then received in common with all the apostles, he now receives an authority proper to himself over the rest, namely supreme and universal jurisdiction over the whole flock of Christ.