Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

davearmstrong

Salesian Apologetics #7: Objections to St. Peter the Rock

Last updated on: February 11, 2020 at 3:25 pm   by Dave Armstrong

Salesian Apologetics #7: Objections to St. Peter the Rock 2020-02-11T15:25:44-04:00 Dave Armstrong

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

This is one of a series of extensive excerpts (with my occasional commentary) from The Catholic Controversy (1596): a classic of Catholic apologetics (originally a collection of pamphlets), written by St. Francis de Sales (1567-1622): a Doctor of the Church [see all the installments by searching “Salesian Apologetics #” on my blog sidebar search function]. Any comments of mine (apart from lists of related links) will be in blue. The rest is from the online, public domain text (3rd revised edition, New York: Benziger Brothers, 1909; translated by Henry Benedict Mackey, O.S.B.).

What I present is an edited abridgment, designed for modern readers: so I will dispense with the constant tedious use of ellipses (“. . .”). I will cite the section of the book used, so that anyone who desires it may consult the full text and/or particular contexts, patristic references (which I omit), etc. I will follow the custom of my paperback TAN Books edition: of italicizing scriptural passages.

*****

Part II, Article VI: Chapter 2: Resolution of a Difficulty

But a great proof of the contrary, as our adversaries think, is that, according to S. Paul: No one can lay another foundation but that which is laid : which is Christ Jesus [1 Cor 3:11]; and according to the same we are domestics of God ; built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus himself being the chief corner-stone [Eph 2:19-20]. And, in the Apocalypse [Rev 21:14],| the wall of the holy city had twelve foundations, and in these twelve foundations the names of the twelve Apostles. If then, say they, all the twelve Apostles are foundations of the Church, how do you attribute this title to S. Peter in particular ? And if S. Paul says that no one can lay another foundation than Our Lord, how do you dare to say that by these words : Thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build my church [Mt 16:18], S. Peter has been established as foundation of the Church ? Why do you not rather say, asks Calvin, that this stone on which the Church is founded is no other than Our Lord ? Why do you not rather declare, says Luther, that it is the confession of faith which Peter had made ?

But in good truth it is an ill way of interpreting Scripture to overturn one passage by another, or to strain it by a forced interpretation to a strange and unbecoming sense. We must leave to it as far as possible the naturalness and sweetness of the sense which belongs to it. In this case, then, since we see that Scripture teaches us there is no other foundation than Our Lord, and the same teaches us clearly that S. Peter is such also, yea and further that the Apostles are so, we are not to give up the first teaching for the second, the second for the third, but to leave them all three in their entirety. Which we shall easily do if we consider these passages in good faith and sincerely.

Now Our Lord is in very deed the only foundation of the Church ; he is the foundation of our faith, of our hope and charity ; he is the foundation of all ecclesiastical authority and order, and of all the doctrine and administration which are therein. Who ever doubted of this ? But, some one will say to me, if he is the only foundation, how do you place S. Peter also as foundation ? ( 1 .) You do us wrong ; it is not we who place him as foundation. He, besides whom no other can be placed, he himself placed him. So that if Christ is the foundation of the Church, as he is, we must believe that S. Peter is such too, since Our Lord has placed him in this rank. If any one besides Our Lord himself had given him this grade we should all cry out with you : No one can lay another foundation hut that which is laid. (2.) And then, have you well considered the words of S. Paul ? He will not have us recognise any foundation besides Our Lord, but neither is S. Peter nor are the other Apostles foundations besides Our Lord, they are subordinate to Our Lord : their doctrine is not other than that of their Master, but their very Master’s itself.

Thus the supreme charge which S. Peter had in the militant Church, by reason of which he is called foundation of the Church, as chief and governor, is not beside the authority of his Master, but is only a participation in this, so that he is not the foundation of this hierarchy besides Our Lord but rather in Our Lord : as we call him most holy Father in Our Lord, outside whom he would be nothing. We do not indeed recognise any other secular authority than that of His Highness [of Savoy], but we recognise several under this, which are not properly other than that of His Highness, because they are only certain portions and participations of it.

(3.) In a word, let us interpret S. Paul passage by passage : do you not think he makes his meaning clear enough when he says : You are built upon the foundations of the Prophets and Apostles ? But that you may know these foundations to be no other than that which he preached, he adds : Christ himself being the chief corner-stone. Our Lord then is foundation and S. Peter also, but with so notable a difference that in respect of the one the other may be said not to be it. For Our Lord is foundation and founder, foundation without other foundation, foundation of the natural. Mosaic and Evangelic Church, foundation perpetual and immortal, foundation of the militant and triumphant, foundation by his own nature, foundation of our faith, hope and charity, and of the efficacy of the Sacraments.

S. Peter is foundation, not founder, of the whole Church ; foundation but founded on another foundation, which is Our Lord ; foundation of the Evangelic Church alone, foundation subject to succession, foundation of the militant not of the triumphant, foundation by participation, ministerial not absolute foundation ; in fine, administrator and not lord, and in no way the foundation of our faith, hope and charity, nor of the efficacy of the Sacraments. A difference so great as this makes the one unable, in comparison, to be called a foundation by the side of the other, whilst, however, taken by itself, it can be called a foundation, in order to pay proper regard to the Holy Word. So, although he is the Good Shepherd, he gives us shepherds [Eph 4:11] under himself, between whom and his Majesty there is so great a difference that he declares himself to be the only shepherd [Jn 10:11; Ezek 34:23].

At the same time it is not good reasoning to say : all the Apostles in general are called foundations of the Church, therefore S. Peter is only such in the same way as the others are. On the contrary, as Our Lord has said in particular, and in particular terms, to S. Peter, what is afterwards said in general of the others, we must conclude that there is in S. Peter some particular property of foundation, and that he in particular has been what the whole college has been together. The whole Church has been founded on all the Apostles, and the whole on S. Peter in particular ; it is then S. Peter who is its foundation taken by himself, which the others are not. For to whom has it ever been said : Thou art Peter, &c. ? It would be to violate the Scripture to say that all the Apostles in general have not been foundations of the Church. It would also be to violate the Scripture to deny that S. Peter was so in particular. It is necessary that the general word should produce its general effect, and the particular its particular, in order that nothing may remain useless and without mystery out of Scriptures so mysterious. We have only to see for what general reason all the Apostles are called foundations of the Church : namely, because it is they who by their preaching have planted the faith and the Christian doctrine ; in which if we are to give some prerogative to any one of the Apostles it will be to that one who said : I have laboured more abundantly than all they [1 Cor 15:10].

And it is in this sense that is meant the passage of the Apocalypse. For the twelve Apostles are called foundations of the heavenly Jerusalem, because they were the first who converted the world to the Christian religion, which was as it were to lay the foundations of the glory of men, and the seeds of their happy immortality. But the passage of S. Paul seems to be understood not so much of the person of the Apostles as of their doctrine. For it is not said that we are built upon the Apostles, but upon the foundation of the Apostles — that is, upon the doctrine which they have announced. This is easy to see, because it is not only said that we are upon the foundation of the Apostles, but also of the Prophets, and we know well that the Prophets have not otherwise been foundations of the Evangelical Church than by their doctrine.

And in this matter all the Apostles seem to stand on a level, unless S. John and S. Paul go first for the excellence of their theology. It is then in this sense that all the Apostles are foundations of the Church ; but in authority and government S. Peter precedes all the others as much as the head surpasses the members ; for he has been appointed ordinary pastor and supreme head of the Church, the others have been delegated pastors intrusted with as full power and authority over all the rest of the Church as S. Peter, except that S. Peter was the head of them all and their pastor as of all Christendom.

Thus they were foundations of the Church equally with him as to the conversion of souls and as to doctrine; but as to the authority of governing, they were so unequally, as S. Peter was the ordinary head not only of the rest of the whole Church but of the Apostles also. For Our Lord had built on him the whole of his Church, of which they were not only parts but the principal and noble parts. “Although the strength of the Church,” says S. Jerome, “is equally established on all the Apostles, yet amongst the twelve one is chosen that a head being appointed occasion of schism may be taken away.” “There are, indeed,” says S. Bernard to his Eugenius, and we can say as much of S. Peter for the same reason, “there are others who are custodians and pastors of flocks, but thou hast inherited a name as much the more glorious as it is more special.”

***

Related Reading:

50 New Testament Proofs for Petrine Primacy & the Papacy [1994] [+ French version] [+ Portugese version]

*

Primacy of St. Peter Verified by Protestant Scholars [1994]

*

Is St. Paul Superior to St. Peter? (Dialogue) [1998; expanded 5-13-02]

*

Reply to Critique of “50 NT Proofs for the Papacy” (vs. Jason Engwer) [3-14-02]

*

Refutation of a Satirical “Pauline Papacy” Argument (vs. Jason Engwer) [9-30-03]

*

Refutation of “Catholicism Refuted”: Pt. II (Tradition, Papacy) [12-10-04]

*

Paul Rebuked Peter: Disproof of Papacy? [2007]

*

Biblical & Patristic Basis for the Papacy (vs. Calvin #13) [5-21-09]

*

Peter the “Rock”: Protestant Contra-Catholic Exegetical Bias [7-7-09]

*

Top 20 Biblical Proofs of the Papacy [12-12-15]

*

“No Pope in the New Testament” & Other Such Myths Debunked [1-21-16]

*

50 Biblical Indications of Petrine Primacy and the Papacy [National Catholic Register, 11-20-16]

*

Armstrong vs. Collins & Walls #10: St. Peter & the Papacy [10-21-17]
*

Salesian Apologetics #6: Papacy (St. Peter the Rock) [2-7-20]

*

***

*

Unfortunately, Money Trees Do Not Exist: If you have been aided in any way by my work, or think it is valuable and worthwhile, please strongly consider financially supporting it (even $10 / month — a mere 33 cents a day — would be very helpful). I have been a full-time Catholic apologist since Dec. 2001, and have been writing Christian apologetics since 1981 (see my Resume). My work has been proven (by God’s grace alone) to be fruitful, in terms of changing lives (see the tangible evidences from unsolicited “testimonies”). I have to pay my bills like all of you: and have a (homeschooling) wife and two children still at home to provide for, and a mortgage to pay.

*

My book royalties from three bestsellers in the field (published in 2003-2007) have been decreasing, as has my overall income, making it increasingly difficult to make ends meet.  I provide over 2700 free articles here, for the purpose of your edification and education, and have written 50 books. It’ll literally be a struggle to survive financially until Dec. 2020, when both my wife and I will be receiving Social Security. If you cannot contribute, I ask for your prayers (and “likes” and links and shares). Thanks!

*

See my information on how to donate (including 100% tax-deductible donations). It’s very simple to contribute to my apostolate via PayPal, if a tax deduction is not needed (my “business name” there is called “Catholic Used Book Service,” from my old bookselling days 17 or so years ago, but send to my email: [email protected]). Another easy way to send and receive money (with a bank account or a mobile phone) is through Zelle. Again, just send to my e-mail address. May God abundantly bless you.

*

***

Photo credit: St. Francis de Sales [Bosco Austalasia / Salesian Journeying with the young]

***

Papacy & Infallibility

apostolic succession

Bible & Papacy

biblical authority

ecclesiology

head of the Church

papacy

papal headship

papal infallibility

papal supremacy

Peter the rock

Petrine primacy

pontiff

popes

primacy of Rome

Roman primacy

St. Francis de Sales

St. Peter

The Catholic Controversy

vicar of christ

Previous Post



February 11, 2020

Dialogue: Are Paul, the Bible, & Catholicism Against Sex?

Next Post



February 12, 2020 Dialogue: Sexist, Misogynist Bible and Christianity?


Browse Our Archives

Select a Category & Last Things About Me Anti-Catholicism Atheism & Agnosticism Baptism and Sacramentalism Bible and Tradition Blessed Virgin Mary Books by Dave Armstrong C. S. Lewis Calvinism & General Protestantism Catholic Apologetics Catholic Apologists Catholic conversion Catholic converts Christmas Church (Ecclesiology) Church History Conversion and Converts Development of Doctrine Eastern Orthodoxy Ecumenism & Christian Unity Eucharist & Liturgy Fathers of the Church French Translations G. K. Chesterton Hell Hell & Satan Hell & Satan & Last Things Heresies & Comparative Religion Holistic Health Inquisition & Crusades & Scandals James White Jews & Judaism & Old Testament John Calvin John Henry Newman Liberal / Modernist Theology Life Issues Literary Resume Lutheranism Mariology Martin Luther Music Orthodoxy Papacy & Infallibility Personal Page Philosophy & Science Political & Ethical & Moral Issues Protestant Persecution & Intolerance Protestantism Purgatory Purgatory & Penance Romantic & Imaginative Theology Saints & Purgatory & Penance Salvation Salvation & Justification Satan & Last Things Sexuality and Gender Issues Spanish Translations Traditionalism vs. Radical Catholic Reactionaries Traducciones al español / tradução para português Trinitarianism & Christology Uncategorized Videos

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 April 2010 March 2010 December 2009 October 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 March 2009 February 2009 October 2008 September 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 May 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 October 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 July 2004 May 2004 April 2004


Follow Us!

Follow Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter



TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does "Pentateuch" mean?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Five Scrolls God's Law Sacred Teachings Holy Writings

Books by This Author Books by Dave Armstrong

See All Titles »

Related posts from Biblical Evidence for Catholicism

Family

Was Peter "Any Old" Apostle? 10 Anti-Papal Arguments

Biblical Evidence for Catholicism

Family

Jesus Founded the [Catholic] Church. If Not Him,...

Biblical Evidence for Catholicism

Family

11 Protestant Objections to Papal Authority Debunked

Biblical Evidence for Catholicism

Family

Matthew 16 & the Papacy (vs. Patrick O'Brien)

Biblical Evidence for Catholicism

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic

Luther on Tools

In "Irreplaceable," our book on vocation and technology, Trevor Sutton and I...

The British Museum-- Part Two

I was strolling through the top floor of the brand new Parthenon...

What Does Gêvâh Mean For Kimberley Guifoyle &...

This week, a lot of the news is focused on Kimberly Guilfoyle....

INNER CIRCLE: Profound Mystery (Of Christ In All...

Ephesians 5:31-32 “For this reason, a man will leave his father and...

Do Not Rejoice When Your Enemy Falls: The...

Turning an execution into a public spectacle is a disturbing expression of...

'The Chosen' S6 Trailer: The Passion Gets Very...

Not many watching 'The Chosen' worry about spoilers, but just because they...

view all Catholic blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube