THE POPE, SAINT PETER & DONALD TRUMP

You are probably aware of the exchange of criticism between President Trump and Pope Leo XIV that has set the news cycles ablaze. In this article, I will address just one particular aspect of the debate that was highlighted by Archbishop James R. Golka of Denver who stated that Trump’s language toward the pope, “fails to reflect the respect owed to the Successor of Peter.”

Now, I believe we should show respect to all human beings and treat one another with a certain dignity and respect. Pope Leo should be shown the same respect shown to the leader of any other Christian denomination. The one thing I will challenge in this article is the idea that the pope is owed a unique and special respect as the “Successor of Peter.” 

That title is found nowhere in Scripture nor did Peter ever exercise a ubiquitous authority in the Church.

Peter is Not the Foundation Rock

Matthew 16:18-19 is used by papal advocates to claim that Jesus said He would build His church on Peter and that He gave Peter the keys of authority over the Church. It is clear, however, from even a cursory examination of this passage, that the church is not built on Peter, but on Peter’s revelation of who Jesus is, i.e., on Jesus Himself.

This is clearly borne out in Jesus’ response to Peter’s revelation of Him as the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Jesus commends Peter for his revelation, saying,

Blessed are you Simon, son of Jonah, for flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to you that you are Peter (petros), and on this rock (petra) I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.

The Greek word for “Peter” in this passage is petros, which referred to a little rock or pebble. The Greek word for “rock” in this passage is petra and it was used to refer to a large massive stone. With a play on these words, Matthew records Jesus as saying, “You are petros (a little rock), and on this petra (a massive rock) I will build my Church.

The foundation on which Jesus said he would build His Church is not a little rock like Peter, but the massive rock—the petra--which is the revelation of who He is, i.e., Himself. Also, the word “you” in vs. 19 concerning the keys of the kingdom is plural, indicating that the keys are given to the church, not solely to Peter.

That the church is built on Christ Himself is affirmed by Paul in I Corinthians 3:11. Commenting on his founding of the church in Corinth, Paul makes it clear that he did not found that church on either Peter or himself. He wrote, For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

This was the belief of the church throughout the early centuries. For example, Saint Augustine (354-430), often acclaimed as the greatest of the church fathers, understood the rock to be, not Peter, but Christ. Commenting on this passage, he wrote,

“Therefore,” He saith, “Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock” which thou hast confessed, upon this Rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God, I will build My Church;” that is upon Myself, “the Son of the living God, will I build My Church” (Hyatt, Infallible Pope, 14).

Interestingly, this was also confirmed by Pope Benedict XVI, who as the young Joseph Ratzinger, wrote in his doctoral dissertation, “If the church is founded on Peter, it is not founded on his person, but on his faith . . . the foundation of the church is Christ.”

No Primacy of Peter in the New Testament

That Peter held no special primacy among the apostles is clearly borne out in the words of Jesus to him after His resurrection as recorded in John 21:15-25. While Jesus is instructing Peter to feed My sheep, Peter turns toward John and says to Jesus, What about this man?

With a stern rebuke, Jesus replied, If I will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me. In other words, there were things about other believers that did not concern Peter. John had a relationship with Jesus that was of no concern to Peter. Peter must give himself to his own task and not meddle in the affairs of others. When he would involve himself with matters that were of no concern to him, he could expect to hear the voice of the Master saying, What is that to you? You follow Me.

Other passages of Scripture make it clear that Peter held no special primacy among the apostles. Consider, for example, that when Peter went to Antioch and waffled concerning the equal acceptance of the Gentiles in Christ, Paul publicly rebuked him in front of the church because, as Paul said, he was to be blamed (Galatians 2:11). Peter obviously accepted this rebuke knowing he was in the wrong.

It is also clear that although Peter is the chief spokesman in the early chapters of Acts, it is obvious that James became the leader of the church in Jerusalem. In the first Church Council of Acts 15, in which Peter participated, it is obvious that James is presiding. After everyone has had their say about whether Gentile believers in Jesus must be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses, it is James who gives the summary statement and the position the Council will take in the matter.

It is also worth noting that the letter formulated to express the determination of this council is from neither Peter nor Paul No individual name is mentioned. The letter begins, The apostles, the elders, and the brethren to the brethren who of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia . . ..

It is also worth noting that there is no evidence that Peter founded the church in Rome. The idea that Peter founded this church is based on dogma, not historical evidence. In Paul’s letter to the church at Rome, written probably in the fall of a.d. 57, he makes no mention of Peter, a bishop, nor any leader. Instead, he addresses the letter, To all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints.

At the end of the letter, Paul sends greetings to numerous people including Priscilla and Aquilla and the church that is in their house (Romans 16:3-5). He also greets Andronicus and Junia whom he says, are of note among the apostles (Romans 16:7). He also greets others who are obviously leaders in the Roman church.

Nowhere in the letter does Paul mention Peter. This strongly indicates that Peter had no part in the founding of the church at Rome, for Paul would certainly have mentioned him if such were the case. The church was most likely founded by some of the many pilgrims from Rome who were in Jerusalem for the Feast of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was poured out in such a dramatic fashion (Acts 2:1-12).

It is also important to note that Peter is never mentioned in Scripture with any special title or commendation. In I Corinthians 1:12, Paul rebuked the Corinthains for building cliques around himself, Apollos, and Peter. He admonished them, saying, Now I say this that each of you says, “I am of Paul” or “I am of Apollos” or “I am of Cephas [Peter]” or “I am of Christ.”

These were cliquish groups who had turned these apostles into celebrities and played them off, one against the other. The ones who said “I am of Christ” did so, not from a sense of reverence and worship, but from a clannish competition with the other groups.

This is made plain by Paul challenging them with certain questions: Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? In other words, by giving honor to Paul, Apollos, and Peter that belonged only to Christ, the Corinthians were creating division. Is that not happening in the church today?

The idea of the primacy of Peter is glaringly missing from the New Testament. It can only be explained as a development of later history that papal advocates seek to impose back on Scripture. It has no basis in either Scripture or early Christianity. Oxford professor, Burnett H. Streeter, was correct when he wrote,

Whatever else is disputable, there is, I submit, one result from which there is no escape. In the primitive church there was no single system of church order laid down by the apostles. During the first hundred years of Christianity, the Church was an organism alive and growing—changing its organization to meet changing needs. Uniformity was a later development (Hyatt, Apostolic Leadership, 43-44).

In Summary

So, as the leader of the world’s largest Christian denomination, we should give Pope Leo the same respect we would give the President of the Southern Baptist Association or the General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God. We do not give him special respect because he carries more impressive sounding titles such as  “Successor of the Prince of the Apostles” and “Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church.” These titles  are nowhere to be found in Scripture.

They express concepts of preeminence and power rooted in historical religious dogma, not Biblical truth. They are from the era when Constantine began merging the church with the empire, which led to the “Romanizing” of Christianity and the development of the modern Roman Catholic Church with its pomp, pageantry and hierarchy.

This article was derived from Dr. Eddie Hyatt's two books, Apostolic Leadership and Infallible Pope?, both available from Amazon and his website at http://eddiehyatt.com.