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

The primacy promised and conferred upon Peter is illustrated by many facts, on the part of Christ, of Peter himself, and of the remaining apostles. Although these facts, taken singly, are not all certain indications of primatial dignity, they nevertheless accord with the primacy, adorn the primacy, and are not explained without the primacy. These facts, therefore, are as it were a shadow of the primatial person, or a picture, in which the image of Peter the primate, depicted in Mt 16 and Io 21, is contained. These, then, are the facts:

1. Christ, setting aside the promise and conferral of the primacy, preferred Peter to the other apostles by several other indications, by imposing on him a symbolic name, by treating him with special favour, and by committing to him the office of confirming the brethren.

a) Peter's symbolic name. When Christ first saw Peter, he said: "Thou art Simon, the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas."¹ Afterwards, in the election of the apostles, he expressly imposed this name upon him.² Now God, as holy Scripture testifies, never imposes bare and empty names, but rather at the same time actually bestows what the name signifies.³ But the meaning and force of Simon's new name the Lord himself interpreted with reference to the primacy or foundation of the Church: "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church."⁴

b) Peter's special favour. Christ turned aside at Capharnaum to Peter's house;⁵ he teaches from Peter's boat;⁶ he bids Peter walk with him upon the waters;⁷ to Peter alone after the miraculous catch of fish he says: "Fear not, from henceforth thou shalt catch men;"⁸ the didrachma, which the tax-collectors had demanded of all the apostles, Christ paid for himself and Peter alone,⁹ so that the remaining disciples at once suspected that Peter was to be set in a higher place, namely in the very vicariate of the Master;¹⁰ Peter's feet he washes first;¹¹ he takes care that his resurrection be announced to Peter in a special manner;¹² to Peter before the others the risen Christ appears.¹³ Thus Christ preferred Peter to the other apostles in many ways.

c) Peter's office of confirming the brethren. Before the passion the Lord says to Peter: "Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat; but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren."¹⁴ Peter is commanded to confirm the brethren (i. e. the apostles and, a fortiori, the other disciples), who had been most violently tempted and shaken in faith. For the fulfilling of this office Peter will be eminently fitted, if he is the head of the whole Church and of the apostles themselves, the vicar of Christ on earth. Deprived, however, of this primatial authority, he would be unfit for that office. If Peter could not give commands to the other apostles, nor were the others bound to obey Peter, Peter's intervention would be ineffective.

Christ, therefore, employed so special a dispensation toward Peter that he conspicuously illustrated the pre-eminence, or primacy, of the apostle.

2. Peter himself, Christ having scarcely yet returned to the Father, showed himself the supreme leader of the rest, as the circumstances of that primitive age permitted. After Christ's ascension, Peter alone teaches the necessity of choosing a new apostle (in place of Judas the transgressor) and directs the entire business of the election, the rest assenting and obeying.¹⁵ On the day of Pentecost, Peter alone, before the others and for the others, who keep silence, preaches and joins the believers to the Church.¹⁶ The first-fruits also of the Gentiles, instructed by a divine vision, he receives into the Christian assembly before the rest of the apostles.¹⁷ In working miracles Peter is first, and he alone defends the apostles before the sanhedrin,¹⁸ just as, of course, a superior is wont to speak not only for himself, but also for his subjects. Peter, before the rest of the apostles, plays the part of judge concerning Simon the magician,¹⁹ and concerning Ananias and Sapphira, God himself miraculously approving the judgment.²⁰ Peter visits all the churches of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee, even those which he himself had not founded.²¹ Acting as president of the council of Jerusalem, Peter first pronounces his judgment, i. e. he so settles the question concerning the legal observances that the others, all controversy being removed, assent.²²

These things being considered, it is clear that Peter exercised the primacy in all those ways and by all those means in which it could then be exercised, since on account of the primitive state of the Church and on account of the extraordinary gifts of the apostles, a more ample exercise of the primatial rights was neither necessary nor opportune. Not only, however, did Peter claim for himself the leading role, but also:

3. The other disciples attributed the leading role to him both in their manner of speaking and in their manner of acting.

a) The disciples' manner of speaking about Peter. As often as Peter is mentioned together with the other apostles in the Gospels, in the Acts, and in the Epistles, he alone is singled out and preferred.

If all the apostles are enumerated by name, Peter is first of all. In all the catalogues of the apostles, just as Judas Iscariot is placed last, so Peter is placed first in order, while the names of the others continually change their place.²³ Nay, Peter is significantly called first in dignity: "The first (πρῶτος) Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, James of Zebedee …"²⁴

"First" is not a numeral adjective, because the others do not hear "second, third, fourth", but it is an appositive of pre-eminence, which according to the usage of the New Testament signifies: one set over others, a prince, a primate.²⁵ Thus Peter is called by the disciples who wrote the sacred records the prince of the apostles, because while Christ was living he was destined for the primacy, whereas after Christ had returned to the Father and while the evangelists were writing, he possessed the primacy in act.

But even if only a few apostles are enumerated by name in Peter's presence, he constantly appears in the first place. Thus "Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother;"²⁶ "Peter and James and John;"²⁷ "Peter and John,"²⁸ "Simon Peter and Thomas, who is called Didymus, and Nathanael... and the sons of Zebedee and two others of his disciples."²⁹ The reason for this preference can be nothing other than Peter's special dignity, since Peter is first neither in age nor in vocation.³⁰ It is confirmed by the fact that, if several are enumerated in order, ascending from the lesser to the greater, Peter is placed in the highest position, immediately before Christ, so that from this we may learn that Peter surpasses all the disciples and is inferior to Christ alone.³¹

Finally, if with the names of all concealed the apostles are cited as a group, Peter nevertheless alone is wont to be expressly named, by means of these expressions: "Simon and they that were with him;"³² "Peter and they that were with him;"³³ "Peter with the eleven;"³⁴ "Peter and the apostles."³⁵ In the same way, moreover, Jesus is written of together with his disciples, so that it may appear that he was the Lord and head of the disciples.³⁶ Therefore this manner of speaking about Peter admonishes that he was acknowledged as the prince of the apostles and the vicar of Christ.

b) The disciples' manner of acting with Peter. Although all were equal in the apostolate, Peter himself also included, nevertheless all the disciples, and Paul himself as well, show in act that Peter was greater in the pastoral office, or hierarchical jurisdiction. All the disciples, and with them the whole primitive Church, tacitly submit to the primacy exercised through Peter by deeds, as we have already seen. They explicitly acknowledge the Petrine primacy when in the election of Matthias the apostle and in the council of Jerusalem, Peter presiding and pronouncing the judgment, all assent and obey; when, Peter decreeing it, the Gentiles are admitted into the bosom of the Church; when the whole Church pours forth common prayer for the imprisoned Peter;³⁷ when in the first twelve chapters of the Acts, where the earliest history of the universal Church is described, almost only Peter's deeds are recorded, while the deeds of the other apostles are touched upon only very briefly.

Paul, in particular, acknowledges Peter as the primate of all. Although, as teacher of the Gentiles taught by God himself, he would not have to be instructed by Peter or by any apostle, nevertheless, to honour Peter, he judged that a journey to Jerusalem must be undertaken: "Neither went I to Jerusalem, to the apostles who were before me: but I went into Arabia, and again I returned to Damascus. Then, after three years, I went to Jerusalem, to see (ἱστορῆσαι) Peter, and I tarried with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles I saw none, saving James, the brother of the Lord."³⁸ Peter was of so great authority that, the other apostles being disregarded, Paul undertook the journey to see him alone. Nay, not merely to see him, because "he did not say ἰδεῖν Πέτρον, but ἱστορῆσαι Πέτρον, as those are wont to speak who visit great and splendid cities for the sake of becoming acquainted with them."³⁹

From this it is already to be presumed that Paul does not deny the Petrine primacy, when in the same epistle, with a few verses interposed, he writes that he withstood to his face the Judaizing Peter,⁴⁰ and likewise affirms that he is equal to Peter in the apostolate.⁴¹

The primatial jurisdiction did not stand in the way of Paul's withstanding to his face the Judaizing Cephas. For sometimes an inferior not only can, but also ought, to correct a superior with due reverence, especially when it is a question of preventing scandal. But Peter's incautious intercourse with the Judaizers, the Mosaic law of foods being observed, was a scandal to the conversion of the Gentiles. Therefore Peter truly had to be reproved, and indeed most fittingly by the apostle of the Gentiles.

Likewise, the primatial jurisdiction did not stand in the way of Paul's affirming that he was equal to Peter in the apostolate. For although Peter excelled in the power of the pastoral office, yet not in the privilege of the apostolate, with which Paul, equally with Peter, had been divinely endowed. Nay, if the exercise of the apostolate, or of preaching, is regarded, Paul surpassed not only Peter, but also all the other apostles,⁴² so much so that he deserves to be called the apostle by excellence and the prince in the apostolate. By as much as Paul was greater than Peter in preaching, by so much was he less than him in jurisdiction.⁴³ In this respect alone, and with this distinction made, both are princes of the apostles and of the Church, according to the verse of Venantius Fortunatus:⁴⁴ "Peter first by the key, Paul also first in doctrine."