1
FOUNDATIONS OF THE PETRINE MINISTRY
by Robert Fastiggi
For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help
towards salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It
was to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, that we believe our
Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant, in order to establish on
earth the one Body of Christ into which all those should be fully incorporated
who belong in any way to the people of God.
Vatican II, Unitatis Redintegratio, 3
The Petrine ministry is central to the nature and identity of the Catholic Church. The
selection of Peter as the head of the primordial apostolic college is attested to in Scripture and
Tradition. When the Twelve chosen by Jesus are listed, Peter’s name is always given first (cf. Mt
10:2; Lk 6:13-16 and Acts 1:13). In the Gospels, Peter is mentioned 114 times. In Acts, his name
appears 57 times. By comparison, John (probably the next most prominent member of the
Twelve) is mentioned 38 times in the Gospels and 8 times in Acts.1 According to one account,
Peter is referred to by name (sometimes as Simon or Cephas) at least 195 times in the New
Testament while the mention of all the rest of the Twelve combined comes to 130.2 The
prominence of Peter in the New Testament is undeniable. It has been recognized by ecumenical
groups of Catholics and Protestants and Catholics and Anglicans.3 Eastern Orthodox scholars
have likewise recognized the special importance of Peter in Scripture.4
The Catholic position, however, goes beyond a simple recognition of Peter as the most
prominent member of the Twelve. Instead, we believe that Christ’s choice of Peter constitutes an
essential moment in the foundation of the Church and her permanent structure. This Catholic
belief is based not only on the witness of Scripture but also from the historical testimony of
tradition and the Magisterium. According to the Catholic faith, the Petrine office does not exist
1
Johann Auer, Dogmatic Theology 8: The Church, the Universal Sacrament of Salvation, trans. Michael
Waldstein (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1993), 228.
2
Scott Butler, Norman Dahlgreen and David Hess, Jesus, Peter & the Keys: A Scriptural Handbook on the
Papacy (Santa Barbara, CA, 1996), 3-4.
3
See Raymond E. Brown, K.P. Donfried and J. Reumann, eds, Peter in the New Testament (Minneapolis,
MN: Augsburg Publishing, 1973) and J. Michael Miller, CSB, What Are They Saying about Papal
Primacy? (New York: Paulist Press, 1983) and The Gift of Authority issued in 1999 by Anglican-Roman
Catholic International Commission [ARCIC]. This latter document can be found under the Pontifical
Council for Promoting Christian Unity on the Vatican web site (vatican.va).
4
See J. Meyendorrf, A Schmemann, N. Afanassief, and N. Koulomzine, The Primacy of Peter (Aylesbury,
UK: The Faith Press, 1973) and J. Meyendorrf, ed. The Primacy of Peter (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s
Seminary Press, 1992).
1
2
because of church law only (ius mere ecclesiasticum); rather it exists by divine law (de iure
divino) and by divine institution (ex institutione divina).5
The Catholic understanding of the Petrine ministry is rooted in Scripture. In the Gospels,
we find Christ designating Peter as the rock upon which Christ’s Church will be built (Mt 16:18).
Peter is given “the keys to the kingdom of heaven” (Mt 16:19), a symbol of his distinct authority
as the Vicar of Christ.6 Moreover, the Lord instructs Peter to strengthen his brethren in the faith
(Lk 22:32) and to feed and tend the flock (Jn 21:15-17). What is revealed in the Gospels is
supported by Tradition. “A revelation is not given,” Newman tells us, “if there be no authority to
decide what it is that is given.”7 Consequently, the classic Petrine texts must be read “within the
living Tradition of the whole Church.”8
It is only within this theological recognition of the Church’s providential ordering that the
following declaration of Lumen Gentium, 18 can be understood:
This sacred synod, following in the steps of the First Vatican Council, teaches
and declares with it that Jesus Christ, the eternal Pastor, set up the holy Church
by entrusting the apostles with their mission as he himself had been sent by the
Father (cf. Jn 20:21). He willed that their successors, the bishops namely, should
be shepherds in his Church until the end of the world. In order that the episcopate
itself, however, might be one and undivided he put Peter at the head of the other
apostles, and in him he set up a lasting and visible source of the unity both of
faith and of communion.9
Clearly the Fathers of Vatican II understood the Petrine office, along with the episcopacy,
to be divinely instituted by Christ Himself. Thus, we are told that the Lord Jesus “having prayed
at length to the Father, called to himself those he willed and appointed twelve to be with him.” 10
Jesus made the choice of the Twelve within the context of prayer and in union with the Father.
Furthermore, these twelve apostles “he constituted in the form of a college or permanent
assembly, at the head of which he placed Peter, chosen from amongst them (cf. Jn 21:15-17).”11 It
is the sovereign will of Jesus, in accordance with “the utterly gratuitous and mysterious design”
of the Father, which is the true source of “the institution, the permanence, the nature and import
of the sacred primacy of the Roman Pontiff and his infallible teaching office.”12
5
See J. Michael Miller, CSB, The Divine Right of the Papacy in Recent Ecumenical Theology (Roma:
Università Gregoriana Editrice, 1980) and Avery Dulles, SJ, “Ius Divinum As An Ecumenical Problem”
Theological Studies 38 (1977) 681-708.
6
See Butler, et. al., 39-68 on the authority of the keys and the power of binding and loosing as interpreted
in the light of the Old Testament passages such as Isa 22:22.
7
J.H. Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (1878) II, 2, 12.
8
Catechism of the Catholic Church [CCC], 113
9
LG, 18 (all Vatican II translations are taken from the Flannery edition, unless otherwise noted).
10
LG, 19.
11
Ibid.
12
LG, 19.
2
3
Vatican II’s declaration of the divine establishment of the Petrine ministry is consistent
with the historical witness of the Church from the beginning. Even within the first century (c. 96
A.D.), we find evidence of the successor of Peter, namely Clement I, speaking with authority to
the Church of Corinth. In reaction to the unjust removal of some presbyters from their functions,
Clement warns the Corinthians of the dangers of disobedience from his instructions:
If, on the other hand, there be some who fail to obey what God has told them
through us, they must realize they will enmesh themselves in sin and in no
insignificant danger (c.59, n. 1)...Yes, you will make us exceedingly happy if you
prove to be obedient to what we, prompted by the Holy Spirit, have written, and
if, following the plea of our letter for peace and harmony, you rid yourselves of
your wicked and passionate rivalry (c. 63, n. 2).13
Clement, as the Bishop of Rome, assumes an authority over the Church of Corinth that demands
obedience.
Further testimony of the preeminence of the Church of Rome is to be found in other early
Patristic writings. In his letter to the Romans (c. 107 A.D.), Ignatius of Antioch speaks of the
Roman Church as enjoying “the presidency” (προκάθημένη) of love.14 Irenaeus, in his Adversus
haereses (c. A.D. 180-199) praises “that very great, oldest and well-known Church, founded and
established at Rome by those two glorious apostles Peter and Paul.”15 Furthermore, he teaches
that “every Church must be in harmony with this Church because of its outstanding pre-eminence
(propter potentiorem principalitatem), that is, the faithful from everywhere, since the apostolic
tradition is preserved in it by those from everywhere.”16 The phrase “potentiorem
principalitatem” has been variously translated as “superior authority,” “superior origin;” “moreexalted origin,” and
“more powerful principality.” All of these communicate the sense of
preeminence over all the other churches, a preeminence that demands harmony or agreement in
doctrine.17
Along with these written testimonies to papal primacy, there is also the witness of
doctrinal interventions. Thus, Pope Victor I (r. 189-198) censured the Quatrodecimans, Callistus I
(r. 217-22) condemned Sabellianism, and Stephen I (r. 254-257) opposed the re-baptism of
heretics. Speaking of the third century pontiffs, Cardinal Newman observed:
Clement’s First Letter, 59,1 and 63,2 in Cyril Richardson, ed. Early Christian Fathers (New York:
Touchstone, 1996), 70 and 75; these selections can also be found in Denzinger-Hünermann [D-H](37th ed.),
*102
14
Ignatius, To the Romans in E. Giles, ed. Documents Illustrating Papal Authority, A.D. 96-454 (London:
SPCK, 1952), 4.
15
Adversus haereses, III, 3, 3 in Richardson, 372.
16
Ibid, III, 3, 2.
17
The importance of this passage of Irenaeus is manifested by its citation in Vatican I’s Pastor Aeternus,
D-H, *3057.
13
3
4
The Popes acted as if they were infallible in doctrine –with a very high hand,
peremptorily, magisterially, fiercely. But when we come to the question of the
analysis of such conduct, I think they had as vague ideas on the subject as many
of the early Fathers had upon portions of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. They
acted in a way which needed infallibility as an explanation [emphasis in
original].18
In the fourth and fifth centuries, testimonies to the preeminence of Bishop of Rome continue,
along with the recognition that this preeminence comes from Christ Himself. Thus, Ambrose, (c.
A.D. 340-397) writes:
That is Peter to whom [Christ] said, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will
build my Church.” Where therefore Peter is there is the Church. Where the
Church is, there is no death, but life eternal. And he also adds, “And the gates of
hades shall not prevail against it, and I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom
of heaven.” Against blessed Peter, neither has the gate of hades prevailed, nor the
gate of heaven shut, but on the contrary he has destroyed the forecourt of hades
and thrown open the heavenly one.19
In a similar manner, Jerome (c. A.D. 342-420) highlights the role of Peter as the head of the
apostolic college. In Adversus Jovinianum, he observes:
But you say that the Church was founded upon Peter: although elsewhere the
same is attributed to all the apostles, and they all receive the keys to the kingdom
of heaven, and the strength of the Church depends on them all alike, yet one
among the twelve is chosen so that when a head has been appointed, there may
be no occasion for schism.20
Witness to Papal Primacy in the Christian East
Mansi = J.D. Mansi, ed. Sanctorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio (Florence,
1759ff).
PG =Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Graeca ed. J.-P. Migne (Paris, 1857ff).
PL= Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina ed. J.-P. Migne (Paris, 1844ff).
It is sometimes believed that claims of Petrine or Papal primacy were purely Western assertions,
often coming from the Popes themselves. While the subject itself is complex, it is important to
realize that many Eastern Fathers of the Church, as well as Western Fathers, upheld the primacy
of the See of Rome. Here are some examples:
St. John Chrysostom: (c. 344-407) clearly taught the primacy of Peter (but the exercise of that
primacy in the successors of Peter was more implicit than explicit in his writings). In speaking of
Peter’s denial of Christ, St. John Chrysostom writes:
From Newman’s letter to Mrs. H. Froude (March, 1871), quoted in full in W. Ward, The Life of John
Henry Cardinal Newman (London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1912), vol. 2, 378-379.
19
Ambrose, Enarratio in Psalmum XL; Migne PL, 14, 1082; Giles, Document 111, 144-145.
20
Jerome, Adversus Jovinianum, Book I; Migne, PL 23, 247; Giles, 155.
18
4
5
After this grievous fall, for no evil equals denial, yet notwithstanding such a great
evil, He [Christ] restores him to his prior dignity [as head of the Apostles] and
entrusts him with the government of the universal Church (Homilia 5 de
poenitentia, Migne, PG 49:308).
At the Council of Ephesus, 431 A.D, almost all the bishops present were from the East.
However, when Philip, one of the legates sent by Pope Celestine, affirmed papal primacy
in his address to the bishops of the Council, no protests were raised. In this speech, Philip
says:
There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and
most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, pillar of the faith, and
foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our
Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him
were given the power of loosing and binding sins: who even to this time and
always, lives and judges in his successors. Our holy and most blessed Pope
Celestine, the bishop, is according to due order his successor and holds his place
(Cited in Vatican I’s Pastor aeternus [Denz.-H, 3056] and found in Mansi 4,
1295 [Latin] 1296 [Greek]).
St. Flavian (d. 449) was the Patriarch of Constantinople from 446 until his untimely death
following his brutal treatment at the Robber Council of Ephesus in 449. He had written to Pope
Leo I asking him to intervene in the Christological dispute over Monophysitism. His appeal to
Leo strikes many as recognition of Papal authority to settle doctrinal disputes. In his letter to the
Pope, he writes:
The whole question needs only your single decision and all will be settled in
peace and quietness. Your sacred letter will with God’s help completely suppress
the heresy which has arisen and the disturbance which it has caused; and so the
convening of council—which is in any case difficult— will be rendered
superfluous. [Flavian, Letter to Leo I on the heresy of Eutyches in Mansi, 5:1255
[Latin] 1256 [Greek].
In 649, Bishop Stephen of Dora, on behalf of Patriarch Sophronius of Jeruslaem,
appealed to Pope Martin I (r.649-655) as the authority who could stop the heresy of
Monotheletism:
I would like to denounce Monothelitism before the eminent Chair, the teacher of
all the chairs; I mean your superior and divine chair, since it may completely heal
the wound. Your chair has been accustomed from the beginning to rule with
apostolic and canonical authority. It is very evident, indeed, that it is not only the
keys to the kingdom of heaven that Peter, alone among all, received (Mt 16:19).
Besides the keys of heaven, by which he can open and shut for the well-being of
believers and the misfortune of unbelievers, this true head and director of the
apostles, was the first entrusted with feeding the sheep of the entire Catholic
Church.(Jn 21:16-17)..and the only one authorized to strengthen his colleagues
and spiritual brothers when they become shaken (Lk 22:31), on account of the
foreknowledge of God Incarnate who, for our sake, gave him power and priestly
5
6
authority over them all. (Mansi, 10, 893 [Greek] 894 [Latin]; cited in Martin
Jugie, AA, Le Schisme Byzantin (Paris: Lethielleux, 1941), 78).
St. Maximus the Confessor (c.580-662) was an opponent of the Monothelite
(one-will in Christ) heresy. However, he also was a great supporter of the primacy and
authority of the Bishop of Rome, and he even defended Pope Honorius I (d. 638) against
those who maintained the Pope was a Monothelite. Speaking of the See of Rome,
Maximus writes:
This Apostolic See, which, from the Incarnate Word of God Himself, as well as
from the holy councils (according to the sacred canons and definitions) has
received and possesses the sovereignty, authority and power of binding and
loosing over all the churches of God in the entire world, in and through all things
(Migne, PG 91:144).
St. Theodore of Studium (759-806) was one of the great defenders of the
veneration of icons against the iconoclast heretics who had been condemned by Nicea II
in 787. The Popes had always defended the use of icons, and this might help to explain
why St. Theodore regarded Rome as the judge of all heresies. In a letter to Pope Leo III,
he writes:
For it is to the great Peter that Christ our God, after having given him the keys of
the kingdom of heaven, conferred the dignity of chief of the flock. It is to Peter,
that is to say, to his successor (pros Petron etoi ton autou diadochon) to whom
one must submit all heretical novelties introduced into the universal Church by
those who distance themselves from the truth (Letter to Pope Leo III, Migne, PG
99:1017).
6