| Orthodoxy is
faith "in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church".
Outside of the Church, there is no salvation, just as
there was no salvation outside of Noah’s ark in the days
of the flood. Orthodoxy is firm faith in the fact that in
the mysteries of the Church lies God’s saving grace.
The Orthodox Church, as "the
pillar and ground of the truth" (I Timothy 3:15), as a
living organism, against which even "the gates of hell
shall not prevail" (Matthew 16:18), and which has Christ
Himself as its Head, abiding with it "always, even to the
end of the age" (Matthew 28:20, NKJV)
Such a Church as a whole
cannot err; for the whole Church to err would be
tantamount to her spiritual death, but, by virtue of the
Savior's promise, she cannot die. But if the Orthodox
Church as a whole cannot err, her individual members,
individual gatherings and groups and even large parts of
her can fall into error. And since the opinion of the
whole Church is made manifest at Ecumenical Councils, the
Ecumenical Councils are the infallible custodians and
interpreters of Divine Revelation - not because the
members of the councils are individually infallible, but
because the decisions of the councils are the voice of the
whole Church, which is directed by the grace of the Holy
Spirit (the decisions of the councils always begin with
the words: "It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us"
[see Acts 15:28]).
This view of the
infallibility of the universal Church, which comes from
Christ and His apostles, was common in Christianity during
the course of the first centuries and remained unchanged
in the Orthodox Church. But in the West, side by side with
other deviations, this view of the infallibility of the
Church also under-went distortion. The Roman bishop was
always considered one of the members of the council, and
he submitted to its decisions. But, in the course of time,
the pope of Rome began to attribute the privilege of
ecclesiastical infallibility to himself alone and, after
long efforts, finally secured the recognition of his
absurd pretension at the Vatican Council of 1870.
Besides the invisible Head,
Jesus Christ, Catholics recognize yet a visible head, the
Roman bishop, the pope, and they consider him, and not the
universal Church, infallible.
The teaching on the
supremacy of the pope arose in the ninth century and is
the main dogma of the Roman confession and its main
difference with Orthodoxy. Catholics assert that Christ
made one of His disciples, namely the Apostle Peter, His
vicar on earth, the prince of the apostles, the head of
the visible Church with plenipotentiary authority over the
apostles and over the whole Church, and that only through
him did all the remaining apostles receive their
grace-filled rights. Catholics also assert that the Roman
pope became the successor of the Apostle Peter and
received all rights and privileges from him as well. He,
the pope, is the head of the whole Church, the vicar of
Christ, the sole bearer for the whole visible Church of
all her grace-filled rights; his voice in matters of
faith, speaking ex cathedra - "from the chair", that is,
officially - is infallible and obligatory for each member
of the Church individually and for all together.
In this dogma of the Roman
Catholic Church, three elements stand out: 1) the teaching
on the supremacy of the Apostle Peter, 2) on the supremacy
of the pope and 3) on his infallibility. Catholics base
the teaching on the supremacy of the Apostle Peter on two
passages of Sacred Scripture. The first pertains to the
sixteenth chapter of the Gospel according to Matthew
(verses 13-19):
"When Jesus came into the
coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples,
saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they
said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some,
Elias; and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. He
saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon
Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of
the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him,
Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath
not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in
heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and
upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of
hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto
thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever
thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and
whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in
heaven."
In the Savior's words
quoted above, nothing is said about the supremacy of the
Apostle Peter or in general about his relation-ship to the
other apostles. Here, Christ is speaking about the
founding of the Church. But the Church is founded not on
Peter alone. In the Epistle to the Ephesians (2:20), the
Apostle Paul, addressing the Christians, says: "[Ye] are
built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets,
Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone"; while
in the First Epistle to the Corinthians (3:10-11), the
Apostle Paul, speaking about the creation of Christ’s
Church, expresses it thus: "According to the grace of God
which is given unto me, as a wise master builder, I have
laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let
every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other
foundation can no may lay than that is laid, which is
Jesus Christ." In the Apocalypse, where the Church is
compared to a city, it says: "And the wall of the city had
twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve
apostles of the Lamb" (Revelation 21:14).
But let us return to the
main passage of the Gospel according to Matthew, by which
Catholics attempt to prove the supremacy of the Apostle
Peter over the other apostles and, through him, of the
pope of Rome over the whole Church. In this Gospel
excerpt, the context clearly shows that the Apostle
Peter’s confession of Christ as the Son of God did not
contain his opinion alone, but that of all the apostles as
well, and that is why, in actuality, the Savior's promise
also pertains to them all. The Savior's question, "But
whom say ye that I am?", was asked completely
unexpectedly, and before the other disciples grasped it,
the Apostle Peter, as the most impulsive, forestalled
them, which happened not infrequently in other instances
as well, and answered the Savior first.
Further. In the Lord’s
words, "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my
church", Catholics regard the words "Peter" and "rock" as
identical and draw the conclusion that allegedly the
Savoir wanted to found the Church on Peter himself, as on
an individual, and on him alone. But here is a confusion
of terms - the proper name is confused with the
appellative. The proper name of this apostle in Hebrew is
Simon. The Savior, seeing the firmness of his faith, gives
him a new name, or, more precisely, a nickname (as He also
did with regard to James and John, calling them "Boanerges",
that is, "sons of thunder" [Mark 3:17]) - Cephas in
Hebrew, Petros in Greek. Here is a kind of play on words,
which Catholic scholasticism also utilizes.
As for the mention of the
keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and the right to bind and
loose, here, in the person of the Apostle Peter, the Lord
is giving a promise to all the apostles - especially since
He repeats the very same promise and in the same
expressions with regard to all the disciples in the same
Gospel according to Matthew, slightly later (8:18); and
after His resurrection, Christ fulfilled this promise,
having said to all the disciples: "Receive ye the Holy
Ghost: whose so ever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto
them; and whose so ever sins ye retain, they are retained"
(John 20:22-23).
Now, let us turn to that
passage in the Gospel according to John, which Catholics
cite, attempting to prove that the supremacy of the
Apostle Peter over the rest of the apostles was
established by God. In the twenty-first chapter of this
Gospel (verses 15-17) we read: Jesus saith to Simon Peter,
Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He
saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee.
He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. He saith to him again
the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He
saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee.
He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. He saith unto him the
third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was
grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest
thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all
things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto
him, Feed my sheep."
In these words, Catholics
see the fulfillment by the Lord of that promise which was
given by Him before to the Apostle Peter, that is, the
granting of authority and supremacy in the Church to
Peter; moreover, by sheep they understand the apostles,
while by lambs - the rest of the faithful.
The Savior's words,
recorded in the Gospel according to John, were uttered
shortly after the resurrection, that is, when the Apostle
Peter was still found under the heavy oppression of his
faintheartedness and renunciation of Christ. It was
essential not only for him, but for the other disciples as
well, to restore him to his previous apostolic dignity.
This restoration was accomplished in this conversation.
The words, "lovest thou me more than these?", serve as a
reminder of Peter’s self-confident words, "Though all men
shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be
offended" (Matthew 26:33-35), and, "Lord, I am ready to go
with thee, both into prison, and to death" (Luke 22:33).
The threefold question, "lovest thou me?", corresponds to
the threefold renunciation by Peter, whom at this point
the Lord no longer calls "Peter", but "Simon", his former
name. The fact that Peter was grieved, was saddened after
the Lord’s third question would be completely inexplicable
if we are to allow that the discussion here is about
granting the supremacy and vicariate to Peter. And, to the
contrary, this sadness is fully understandable if the
Apostle Peter had seen in the Lord’s words a reminder of
his renunciation. And it is hard to reconcile the Savior's
further words with the supremacy of the Apostle Peter.
While following after the Teacher, the Apostle Peter,
having seen John, asked: "And what about this man?", and
in reply he heard: "If I will that he tarry till I come,
what is that to thee? follow thou me" (John 21:22). It is
hard to suppose that the Savior would speak thus to him
whom He had assigned as His vicar and as the prince of the
Apostles.
As for the Savior's words
to Peter: "Feed my lambs; feed my sheep", the word "feed"
does not at all signify the supreme authority of
pastorship, as Catholic theologians assert, but simply the
authority and responsibilities of pastorship proper to all
the apostles and their successors. And there is no
necessity to under-stand the words "sheep" and "lambs" in
the sense of flock and pastors, understanding by the
latter the very apostles themselves, as the Catholics
would like, but more simply, following the Holy Fathers of
the Church, to see in the sheep and the lambs two groups
of the faithful - the less perfect and the more perfect,
the infants in the faith and the adults.
The Orthodox Church teaches
that the twelve apostles were completely equal among
themselves according to their dignity, authority and
grace. In a certain sense, it is possible to call the
Apostle Peter the first, but the first among equals. This
teaching is confirmed by the whole history of the
apostles, as it is set forth in the books of the New
Testament, where the full equality of the apostles among
themselves is demonstrated indisputably (for example,
Matthew 4:18-19; 10:1, 40; 19:28; 20:24-27; 23:8-11; Mark
10:35-37, 16:15; Luke 22:22-30 and many others); many
passages demonstrate that the apostles received not only
the grace of apostleship, but also the right to act by
this grace in the Church, directly from Christ the Savior,
and not from the Apostle Peter (Matthew 4:18-22; Mark
1:16-20; Luke 9:1-6, John 20:21-23, and many others), and
that all the apostles without exception are liable to a
higher court - the Church (for example, Matthew 18:17).
The history of the
Apostolic Council (Acts, Chapter 15) speaks especially
clearly against the supremacy of the Apostle Peter. The
Antiochian Christians appeal not to the Apostle Peter for
the resolution of their perplexity, as should have
occurred if we are to believe the Catholic dogma, but to
all the apostles and presbyters. We see in this excerpt
from the book of the Acts of the Apostles that the
question at the Council is subject to a general discussion
by the Council and that the completion of the matter at
the Council belongs to the Apostle James, and from his
words the decision is written, and not from the words of
the Apostle Peter.
The fact that Peter,
according to the testimony of Sacred Scripture, is sent by
the apostles (Acts 8:14), gives an account of his actions
to the apostles and the faithful (Acts 11:4-18) and
listens to their objections and even denunciations (Gal.
2:11-14), which of course, could not be if Peter were the
prince of the apostles and head of the Church, also speaks
against the Catholic teaching.
Orthodox theology strictly
differentiates between the grace-filled service of the
apostles and that of bishops. Bishop Alexander (Semenov-Tian-Shansky)
writes of this: "The significance of the apostles was
exceptional and in many ways exceeded the significance of
bishops. Bishops head local churches, while the apostles
were wandering preachers of the Gospel. An apostle, having
founded a new local Church in some locale, would ordain a
bishop for it and would himself go to another place to
preach. In con-sequence of this, the Orthodox Church does
not honor the Apostle Peter as the first bishop of Rome.
Nonetheless, the Holy Church always allowed that among the
bishops one is recognized as first in honor, but
concerning his infallibility there is no discussion.
|