Sponsored by the Vincentian Community
(Congregation of the Mission) and the Missouri Knights of Columbus.
Reprinted with permission.
The first thing that strikes the reader of the Acts of the Apostles is that St. Peter immediately assumed leadership. There was no meeting to elect a chairman of the group recently orphaned by the ascension of their Lord into heaven. Instead, Peter swung into action and presided at the first session, held to elect a successor to the traitor, Judas. Matthias was elected as an official witness to Jesus and His resurrection.
After the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles, Peter takes the initiative, delivers the first sermon, instructs the crowds, explains the miracle of Pentecost, and tells them what to do to be saved.
It was Peter who performed the first miracle in favor of the newborn Christian community (Acts 3:1-11). When an explanation of what had happened is requested, it is Peter who acts as spokesman. When the Apostles were hailed into court and interrogated, again Peter is the spokesman. When the Jewish authorities forbade the Apostles to teach, Peter made the splendid and courageous reply: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, decide for yourselves. For we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (Acts 4: 19-20).
The first converts outside of Judea were from among the Samaritans. They practiced circumcision but did not accept the full Jewish faith. In fact, there was bitter racial hatred between the two groups. The fact that the deacon Philip brought the Christian message to them is a striking indication that Christianity would in due time remove all racial barriers, and come to the view so tersely stated by St. Paul in his letter to the Galatians: “For all you who have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor freeman; there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:27-28).
Such an important advance toward realizing the Christian ideal deserved to be noted in a very special way. And so the twelve urge Peter to confirm these new converts in the faith. The deacon Philip had baptized them, but another sacrament was called for, namely, the laying on of hands by an Apostle, before their conversion would be complete and they would receive the full effects of the Holy Spirit.
The Gentiles And The Law
Here again we note that there is no haphazard action, such as the absence of organization would unavoidably entail. The leaders take counsel, and after expressing their views, they all urged Peter and John to welcome the first non-Jewish converts into the Church by imposing hands on them so that they might receive the Holy Spirit. (Acts 8:14)
The Samaritan converts followed the Law of Moses and were therefore circumcised. This rite was the legal initiation of God’s chosen people. The admission of the Samaritans was no special problem in that respect. But what about non-circumcised Gentiles who sought admission into the fold of Christ? Were they to be circumcised and required to observe the Mosaic Law?
This question the Apostles would have unanimously answered in the affirmative, unless they had received special directives to the contrary from God. They did receive such directions. To whom were the directions given and who was the first to promulgate them? Obviously the leader of the Christian Church was the one to receive the message from heaven and officially promulgate it. Accordingly, Peter received the first Gentile convert, Cornelius, and officially promulgated the decree that the Mosaic Law was no longer binding; that Gentiles could be received into the Church without the rite of circumcision because it had been replaced by Baptism (Acts 10:1-47).
This is further evidence that the primitive Church was authoritarian, that it operated through a supreme living authority, and that it was an organized religious group. Peter continued to be the shepherd, the leader, the official teacher of the flock and faithfully continued to discharge the office to which the Master had appointed him (John 21:15-17).
Council At Jerusalem
This startling practice, different from the traditional practice, was difficult for the Jews to accept. They had been taught that the Mosaic Law, because it was divine, was unchangeable. It was, they thought, the perfect Law. The shock that some of the Jewish Christians experienced at the revolutionary pronouncement of Peter can scarcely be appreciated by us today. And so there arose in the infant Church the first group to protest the leadership of Peter. The cleavage became so sharp and the discussion so bitter, that finally an assembly was held at Jerusalem to discuss the matter and promulgate an official decision.
Peter presided at this meeting. After “a long debate” (Acts 15:7) Peter delivered his pronouncement, and “the whole meeting quieted down” (Acts 15:12). Why this sudden ending to a long and sharp dispute, except that they respected the authority of Peter? Did they not recall the words of the Master to Simon Bar-Jona: “I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Meet. 16:19)? Recalling that solemn pronouncement and hearing Peter’s decision, the loyal followers of Jesus had to “hold their peace and keep silent.”
The Apostle James
Miracles always have indicated God’s approval of a prophet or a teacher and the doctrine he proclaimed. And so, as unmistakable evidence that God had ratified Peter’s stand on this matter, Paul and Barnabas proclaimed the numerous miracles God had wrought among the Gentiles (the uncircumcised) by them (Acts 15:12).
Among the Apostles none was so exact in observing the Mosaic Law as James. For that reason the Jewish converts greatly respected him. They faced a tremendous emotional block in accepting the new doctrine. But if they heard thee doctrine approved by one they deeply admired, their problem would be greatly lessened. And so James spoke along the same lines as Peter, and alleged the argument which was of supreme meaning to the Jews, the Sacred Scriptures.
From all this, it may be seen that the living voice of Peter was the authority in the first Christians’ faith. Living authority, speaking clearly and with finality, settled matters in dispute. What would have happened if the Savior had not given His Church such an effective means of knowing definitely what the will and teaching of God is?
When Peter took the initiative no one questioned his right. There was no longer any dispute, such as had engaged the twelve as to who was the greatest among them (Mark 9:32-35). Peter’s leadership was accepted because the Master had chosen him when He said to him: “Feed my lambs . . . feed my sheep” (John 21:15-16). The Master also had appointed Peter to strengthen the faith of his brethren (Luke 22: 32). Now that all had been enlightened by the Holy Spirit, they could no longer question the disposition of affairs which their Lord and God had made.
It cannot be argued that the type of organization which the Master set afoot in the first Christian century and the constitution of the Church which He built on Peter, the Rock, could have been changed. Nor can it be rightly said that Peter usurped the position of preeminence which the Acts picture him as holding. Such a drastic change, contrary to the wishes of the Master, would have aroused violent protest there is no Scriptural evidence that Peter usurped his position.
On the contrary, there is clear and forceful Scriptural evidence that the Church, as Jesus founded it, with the same type of organization and constitution, has continued on down through the centuries. The Scriptural evidence is that the Church, which Jesus established and as He established it, will endure until the end of time. “The gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matt. 16-18).
Peter And Paul
But, some may argue, did not Paul withstand Peter to his face? (Gal. 2: 11). It should always be borne in mind that Peter’s authority was final in matters of doctrine and legislation. His own personal conduct is another matter. And when St. Paul withstood Peter to his face, he thought that Peter’s conduct was not consistent with his legislation and solemnly promulgated decree of the Council of Jerusalem.
St. Paul was for carrying that decree to its ultimate practical consequences. But Peter, wishing to respect the delicate sensibilities of the Jewish Christians and to preserve the peace, was a bit inconsistent in his conduct. He, out of human respect for the Jewish Christians, withdrew from the Gentile Christians when some of the rabid diehards from Jerusalem came to Antioch. He was weary of arguing with them, and he did not have the desire to go over all that matter again. So, while his convictions were exactly as Paul’s, his actions, while not wrong, were capable of being misunderstood. That is why Paul called this matter to Peter’s attention.
Earlier in this same epistle Paul declares that he had come to a complete agreement with Peter: “They (Peter, James and John) gave to me the right hand of fellowship” (Gal. 2 9).
For the first twenty-five years or so after the beginning of the Church on Pentecost, the Bible contained only the Old Testament, and its contents did not seem to have been definitely fixed. About 52 A. D. or thereabouts, the first books of the New Testament were written. From then to the end of the first century A. D., other New Testament books made their appearance. It was, however, several centuries before they were all assembled and presented to the Church as the New Testament.
St. Peter had the deepest faith in the Old Testament Scriptures as the inspired word of God. He writes: “We have the word of prophecy, surer still, to which you do well to attend, as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. This, then, you must understand first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is made by private interpretation. For not by will of man was prophecy brought at any time; but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pet. 1:19-21).
Heavenly Glory
This important statement of Peter calls for some comment. The leader of the Apostles had just appealed to the authority of Jesus Christ as attested by the Transfiguration at which Peter was one of the three privileged witnesses. Since Jesus appeared on earth, the Old Testament prophecies had become more sure. Their meaning had been clarified and the certainty of their complete realization had been strengthened by the very fact that Jesus Himself has brought so many of them to complete realization.
The prophecies which St. Peter had in mind concerned the final return of the Lord in glory and triumph at the end of the world. The hope of His glorious and victorious return has become more vivid since Peter beheld the Lord in His dazzling, heavenly glory on the Mount of the Transfiguration. This hope, and the predictions which express and nourish it, will shine like a light until the day of unending brilliance to be ushered in at the second and final coming of Jesus to earth. Then Christ, the Light of the world, will come and drive out all darkness. He will gather His faithful ones and clothe them with His own wonderful light.
Private Interpretation?
But the Scriptures which sustain this hope must be rightly understood. They must not be interpreted by each individual according to his own wishes, whims, caprice or fancy. This is what some of St. Peter’s contemporaries had done, and had reached false conclusions. If the individual is not to interpret the Scriptures for himself, who then is to do it for him? St. Peter does not say in so many words, but he clearly suggests that the opposite of private interpretation is a safe guide in arriving at the correct understanding of the Bible. And that safe guide, that official interpreter, is our Lord. He had opened the minds of the disciples to understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:45). Since His departure from earth, it is the Church which He had commissioned to teach all nations. “This pillar and ground of truth” is the official interpreter.
St. Peter gives the reason for ruling out private interpretation and recognizing only the official interpretation as the safe guide. The reason is that the sacred writers, responsible immediately for writing the Bible, did not, on their own initiative, express their own ideas. They were moved, impelled, inspired by God. And, therefore, only those who have been officially designated by God as teachers in His Church, only those who have been promised the abiding presence, guidance and enlightenment of Christ and the Holy Spirit, have the requisite qualifications to interpret officially, correctly and truly the divine message contained on the pages of the Bible.
St. Peter had good reason to warn against the private and unenlightened interpretation of the Scriptures. It was being done in too many instances in his own time. He writes later that there are many things in the Scripture, and especially in St. Paul’s epistles, that are difficult to understand, and which the unlearned and unstable wrest to their own destruction (2 Pet. 3:16).
To sum up, St. Peter was firmly convinced of the inspiration of the Scriptures; the Bible was for him without a doubt the inspired word of God. But its proper understanding required an authorized and divinely guided interpreter. Otherwise it might be easily misunderstood and, instead of leading to God and to Christ, could lead the unwary and presumptuous reader away from Him Who is the Way, the Truth and the Life.