Neither Pope nor Supreme Pastor: One-Person Leadership in the Light of
the Apostolic Church
A
biblical, historical, and doctrinal study of Matthew 16:18, which debunks the
idea of supreme leadership in the Church, from the Roman papacy to the one-man
evangelical pastorate.
There is no
historical or biblical evidence that in the first-century apostolic
church there was a single, supreme leader or one with functions
similar to what the "Pope" later became in Roman Catholicism.
Some key points:
1. Collegiate government, not
monarchical
·
In the book of
Acts, authority rested with the apostles as a whole (Acts
2:42; Acts 6:2).
·
Later, in the
local churches, elders (presbyters) and bishops (overseers) were
established, always in the plural (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5). There was
no single “head” of the community.
2. The Council of Jerusalem
(Acts 15)
·
When the great
controversy over circumcision arose, the apostles and elders met
together to discuss it.
·
Peter spoke, Paul
and Barnabas too, and finally it was James (the Lord's brother and
leader in Jerusalem) who gave the conclusion.
This shows that decisions were reconciled
in community, not imposed by a single person.
3. Diverse leaderships, not a
pontiff
·
Peter played an
important role in evangelization, especially among the Jews (Galatians 2:7-8).
·
Paul was the
leading apostle among the Gentiles.
·
James had great
influence in Jerusalem.
Neither of them
was “Pope” of the entire church.
4. Apostolic teaching
·
Peter himself
presents himself as “elder” among the elders (1 Peter 5:1-3),
not as supreme head.
·
Paul affirms that
Christ is the head of the Church (Ephesians 1:22; Colossians
1:18).
5. Early Patristic History
·
Early Christian
writings (such as the Didache, Clement of Rome, Ignatius of
Antioch) speak of local bishops, deacons, and presbyters, but do not
mention a universal bishop over all.
·
The idea of a
universal “Pope” was consolidated much later, around the 3rd–4th
centuries, when the church in Rome began to claim preeminence.
In
conclusion:
The early
apostolic church was governed in a collegial and decentralized manner,
with Christ as its Head and the apostles and elders as its guides. The figure
of a Pope as a single, universal leader did not exist in apostolic times; it is
a later development in church history.
■□
Matthew 16:18 ("You
are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church") has been
misinterpreted to justify both the Catholic papacy and, in some cases, a one-man
leadership in evangelical churches.
1. The original text
·
In Greek:
o
“You are Petros
(Πέτρος, small stone)
o
and upon this petra
(πέτρα,
rock, solid foundation) I will build my church.”
·
Jesus makes a play
on words, but distinguishes between Peter (a small
stone) and the great rock (foundation).
2. What is the rock?
There are two historical interpretations
among the early Church Fathers:
1.
Peter’s
confession (“You are the
Christ, the Son of the living God”) is the rock.
o
This agrees with
1 Corinthians 3:11: “Other foundation can no one lay than that which is
laid, which is Jesus Christ.”
2.
Christ
himself is the rock (not
Peter).
o
Ephesians 2:20: “Built
on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the
chief cornerstone.”
In neither case
does Peter become a “Pope” or universal leader.
3. Peter's role in the NT
·
Peter opens the
door of the gospel to the Jews (Acts 2) and to the Gentiles (Acts 10).
·
But Paul publicly
corrected him when he was wrong (Galatians 2:11-14). This shows that he
was neither infallible nor supreme.
·
Peter presents
himself as “co-elder” (1 Peter 5:1), not as supreme head.
4. Jesus on authority in the Church
Jesus was clear: “The greatest
among you must be your servant” (Matthew 23:11).
·
He did not establish
a pyramidal hierarchical system with a top leader.
·
Authority in the
church is one of service and pastoral care, not dominion
(Matthew 20:25-28).
5. Application to evangelical
churches
When an
evangelical church establishes a senior pastor with unquestionable
authority, based on Peter as the “rock,” it is repeating the same error
of interpretation that gave rise to the papacy.
·
The biblical
model is plurality of elders/pastors in each local church
(Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5).
·
Not an “anointed
one” or “man of God” that no one can contradict.
In conclusion:
Jesus never
appointed Peter as Pope, nor any man as the "head" of the Church. The
rock is Christ Himself and the confession of faith in Him. The
early church functioned with a college of elders, not with
a supreme leader.
EXEGETICAL
AND DOCTRINAL STUDY OF MATTHEW 16:18, STEP BY STEP, ANALYZING THE GREEK, THE HISTORY AND THE PRACTICAL
APPLICATION.
Study of Matthew 16:18
“And I say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my
church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.”
1. Immediate context
Jesus asks his disciples:
·
“Who do
people say the Son of Man is?” (Mt
16:13).
·
Peter answers: “You
are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16).
This confession is the center of the passage.
2. Linguistic analysis
·
“Petros”
(Πέτρος): meaning “small
stone, fragment of rock”. Male name given to Simon.
·
“Petra” (πέτρα): massive rock, crag, solid foundation. Used in
classical and biblical Greek to refer to stability and permanence.
Biblical example:
·
1 Corinthians
10:4: “The rock (petra) was Christ.”
The change of gender and meaning indicates that Jesus is making a play
on words, but not literally identifying Peter with the cornerstone.
3. What or who is the rock?
a) Catholic interpretation (4th
century onwards)
·
The rock = Peter,
foundation of the Church.
·
From here comes
the idea of the papacy.
b) Older patristic interpretation
Many Church Fathers understood that
the rock is not Peter, but:
1.
The confession
of faith in Christ.
o
Origen (3rd
century): “The Church is built on all those who confess that Jesus is the
Christ.”
o
Chrysostom: “On
this faith I will build my Church.”
2.
Christ
himself as the rock.
o
Augustine (in his
last position): “The rock is Christ, not Peter.”
Both readings have biblical support and maintain Christ as the true
foundation.
4. Biblical support
·
Ephesians 2:20: “Built
on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the
chief cornerstone.”
·
1 Peter 2:4-8: Peter
himself recognizes that Christ is the living stone, the chief
cornerstone.
·
1 Corinthians
3:11: “Other foundation can no one lay than that which is laid, which is
Jesus Christ.”
Peter never presents himself as a foundation, but as another stone
in the spiritual building (1 Peter 2:5).
5. The keys of the kingdom
(Mt 16:19)
·
Jesus gives Peter
the keys, a symbol of authority to open the kingdom.
·
Pedro uses them
in:
o
Acts 2: Open the
door to the Jews.
o
Acts 8: Open the
door to the Samaritans.
o
Acts 10: Opens
the door to the Gentiles (Cornelius).
·
After this, keys
are not inherited or transferred to a universal successor.
6. The error of one-person
leadership
·
In Acts 15 (the
Jerusalem Council), the decision was made jointly by the apostles and
elders, not just by Peter.
·
Paul confronts
Peter when he makes a mistake (Galatians 2:11-14). This proves that he was
neither infallible nor supreme.
·
Peter calls
himself “co-elder” (1 Peter 5:1), not chief of all.
7. Doctrinal conclusion
·
Jesus did not
institute a papacy or human supreme leadership.
·
The rock is Christ
Himself or the confession of faith in Him, which is
the same in essence.
·
Authority in the
early Church was collegial (apostles and elders), never
monarchical.
·
Using this text
to justify a Pope, or an “untouchable senior pastor” in evangelical
churches, is a distortion of the original meaning.
Summary :
Matthew
16:18 does not establish the supremacy of Peter or the papacy, but rather the
centrality of Christ as the Rock. The church is built on Christ and the
confession of faith in Him, and all believers form living stones in that
spiritual building.
HISTORICAL AND DOCTRINAL
COMPARISON OF HOW MATTHEW 16:18 (“YOU ARE PETER, AND UPON THIS ROCK I WILL
BUILD MY CHURCH…”) HAS BEEN INTERPRETED IN THE THREE GREAT CHRISTIAN
TRADITIONS: CATHOLIC, ORTHODOX AND PROTESTANT.
Comparison
of Interpretations of Matthew 16:18
1. Roman Catholic Church
·
Interpretation:
o
The “rock” =
Peter himself, instituted by Christ as the visible foundation of the Church.
o
The “keys” =
supreme authority to govern the universal Church.
o
This authority is
considered to have passed to the bishops of Rome as successors of Peter.
·
Developed
doctrine:
o
The idea of the papacy
is born, with universal jurisdiction and infallibility in matters of
faith and morals (defined in 1870 at the First Vatican Council).
·
Problem:
o
There is no pope
in the Apostolic Church. The papacy emerged gradually in the 3rd–5th centuries,
when Rome claimed primacy over the other churches.
2. Eastern Orthodox Church
·
Interpretation:
o
The “rock” = Peter’s
faith, his confession: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living
God. ”
o
Peter is
important, but not unique nor superior to the other apostles.
·
Authority
in the Church:
o
They reject the
supremacy of the Bishop of Rome.
o
synodal/collegial
model, where all bishops
are equal, and some have “primacy of honor” (e.g., the Patriarch of
Constantinople), but not universal authority.
·
Developed
doctrine:
o
The foundation of
the Church is Christ himself and the confession of faith in Him.
o
Authority is
distributed among all bishops as successors of the apostles, but without a
Pope.
3. Protestant Traditions
·
Majority
interpretation:
o
The “rock” =
Christ himself, or Peter’s confession of faith in Christ.
o
They base this on
passages such as:
§
1 Corinthians 3:11
→ “No one can lay any foundation other than Jesus Christ.”
§
Ephesians 2:20 →
Christ, the cornerstone.
§
1 Peter 2:4–8 →
Peter himself declares that Christ is the living stone.
·
Authority
in the Church:
o
They reject the
papacy and all universal leadership.
o
They emphasize
the plurality of elders/pastors in each local church.
o
Some evangelical
groups, however, have copied the idea of a “ chief pastor ” as if he
were a supreme figure within his congregation, although this does not derive
from Matthew 16:18.
·
Developed
doctrine:
o
Sola
Scriptura: the authority
is in the Word of God, not in a man.
o
Christ is the
only head of the Church (Colossians 1:18).
4. Comparative summary
|
Tradition |
Who is the rock? |
Resulting authority |
Main criticism |
|
Catholic |
Peter, foundation of the Church |
Pope = universal successor of Peter, with primacy and sometimes
infallibility |
Late development, does not appear in the Apostolic Church |
|
Orthodox |
Peter's Faith/Confession (Christ as Messiah) |
Collegiate authority of bishops, without a Pope; primacy of honor only |
It can dilute practical unity by rejecting central leadership. |
|
Protestant |
Christ Himself or the Confession of Faith in Christ |
Christ is the only Head; authority shared by local elders/pastors |
Risk: Some churches copy the papal model with a “supreme pastor” |
Conclusion :
·
Catholic interpretation made Peter the rock → universal
papacy.
·
The Orthodox
saw in Peter's faith the foundation → collegial authority.
·
The Protestant
returned to the text and the rest of the NT → Christ as the only rock
and head.
A
historical outline showing
the transition from Peter's confession of faith and collegial government in the
early Church to the consolidation of the Roman papacy in the
5th century.
Historical Line: From the Apostolic Church to
the Roman Papacy
1st Century
(Apostolic Age)
·
Christ is proclaimed as the sole Head of the Church
(Col 1:18; Eph 1:22).
·
The authority was
collegial: apostles + elders (Acts 15).
·
Peter is a key
figure, but not supreme or infallible (Gal 2:11–14).
·
Local churches
governed by elders/presbyters (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5).
There
is no trace of a universal “Pope.”
2nd century
·
Early Christian
writings emerge (Didache, Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome).
·
“bishop” began to be used to refer to the leader of a
local church, but always in plurality or with limited authority.
·
Rome is seen as an important church, because:
o
It was in the
capital of the empire.
o
It had a large
Christian community.
o
It suffered
notable persecutions (Peter and Paul died there).
However, his bishop did not yet have universal
authority.
3rd century
·
The
centralization of authority in the bishops increases (called episcopal
monarchism).
·
The Bishop of
Rome begins to claim a certain preeminence over other
churches, claiming that Peter died there.
·
Some doctrinal
conflicts (such as the baptism of heretics) show bishops of Rome trying to
impose their criteria, but the other churches did not always accept.
Rome
begins to be influential, but not recognized as supreme.
4th century
·
Constantine
legalizes Christianity
(Edict of Milan, 313).
·
Rome gains even
more political and ecclesiastical weight by being in the capital.
·
At the ecumenical
councils (Nicaea 325, Constantinople 381), Rome had primacy of honor,
not jurisdiction.
·
The Council
of Sardica (343) mentions appeals to the bishop of Rome, but not yet
as universal Pope.
The idea is spreading that Rome has a special
role.
5th century
·
410: Sack of Rome by the Visigoths. The city loses
political power, but the Bishop of Rome gains prestige as a spiritual defender.
·
440–461:
Pope Leo I (Leo the Great) :
o
He strongly
asserts that the Bishop of Rome is the successor of Peter.
o
He intervenes in
councils and doctrinal decisions (Council of Chalcedon, 451).
o
His theology of
the Petrine primacy marks a before and after.
Here the papacy is consolidated in the formal
sense: the Bishop of Rome begins to be recognized as the supreme leader in the
West.
Summary
1.
1st
Century: Collegiate
authority → Christ, single head.
2.
2nd
century: Rome was
important, but without supremacy.
3.
3rd
Century: Bishop of Rome
demands more influence, without full acceptance.
4.
4th
century: Rome with
primacy of honor, not universal jurisdiction.
5.
5th
century: With Leo the Great, the papacy is institutionalized as the succession of Peter.
In conclusion:
The papacy did not exist in the apostolic church. It
was a progressive construction: from Peter's confession in
Matthew 16 → to the honorific primacy of Rome → to the universal power of the
Pope (5th century onwards) .
No comments:
Post a Comment