On the feast day of St. Ambrose, December 7th, the Holy Father expressed three wishes as he used an iPad to light the world’s largest electronic Christmas tree. All three wishes focus on overcoming the present darkness of our world.
Listers, on the feast day of St. Ambrose, December 7th, the Holy Father expressed three wishes as he used an iPad to light the world’s largest electronic Christmas tree. All three wishes focus on overcoming the present darkness of our world.
The following is as reported by the Vatican Information Service. The following article is taken verbatim, while the titles have been added.
Late Wednesday afternoon, 7 December, thanks to a “tablet” connected to the power grid, Benedict XVI lit the largest Christmas tree in the world from the papal apartments. This electronic “tree” is located in the Italian town of Gubbio. Before flipping the switch he addressed a few words – by television – to those attending the ceremony.
“Before lighting the tree”, he said, “I would like to express three wishes. This Christmas tree is formed on the slopes of Mt. Ingino at whose summit is found the basilica of Gubbio’s patron saint, St. Ubaldo. When we look at it our eyes are lifted up, raised toward the sky, toward the world of God”.
First Wish: That We Would Remember God
“My first wish, therefore, is that our gaze, that of our minds and our hearts, not rest only on the horizon of this world, on its material things, but that it in some way, like this tree that tends upward, be directed toward God. God never forgets us but He also asks that we don’t forget Him”.
“The Gospel recounts that, on the holy night of Christ’s birth, a light enveloped the shepherds, announcing a great joy to them: the birth of Jesus, the one who brings us light, or better, the One who is the true light that illuminates all. The great tree that I will light up shortly overlooks the city of Gubbio and will illuminate the darkness of the night with its light”.
Second Wish: That in Our Darkness, We Would Remember the Christ Child
“My second wish is that we recall that we also need a light to illumine the path of our lives and to give us hope, especially in this time in which we feel so greatly the weight of difficulties, of problems, of suffering, and it seems that we are enshrouded in a veil of darkness. But what light can truly illuminate our hearts and give us a firm and sure hope? It is the Child whom we contemplate on Christmas, in a poor and humble manger, because He is the Lord who draws near to each of us and asks that we receive Him anew in our lives, asks us to want Him, to trust in Him, to feel His presence, that He is accompanying us, sustaining us, and helping us”.
Third Wish: That We Would Be Lights of Love that Illuminate the Darkness
“But this great tree is formed of many lights. My final wish is that each of us contribute something of that light to the spheres in which we live: our families, our jobs, our neighbourhoods, towns, and cities. That each of us be a light for those who are at our sides; that we leave aside the selfishness that, so often, closes our hearts and leads us to think only of ourselves; that we may pay greater attention to others, that we may love them more. Any small gesture of goodness is like one of the lights of this great tree: together with other lights it illuminates the darkness of the night, even of the darkest night”.
There are 20 different Eastern Catholic Churches with 16 million members.
Listers, let us consider the simple but much needed work of Deacon Ed Faulk: 101 Questions and Answers on Eastern Catholic Churches. Deacon Faulk has dual faculties: Roman Catholic and Melkite-Greek Catholic, and has produced a wondrous primer to understanding our Eastern brothers and sisters.
The following is a very basic introduction to the topic.
1. What is the difference between the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Church?
Many are aware that in AD 1054 the Church suffered a “Great Schism,” and the churches in the East became known as the “Orthodox Churches” and the Church in the West retained the name “Catholic.” Over the years, certain orthodox churches – for various reasons – began to “petition Rome for union.” The Deacon explains “the first of these was the Chaldean Church and, later, the Union of Brest (1595), which led to a long period of “Uniatism.” In time, every single tradition within the orthodox church came to have a counterpart that had returned to Rome. These returned Orthodox churches are known as “Eastern Catholics Churches.”
Two “Eastern Catholic Churches” do not have an orthodox equivalent: the Maronites and the Italo-Albanians.
2. So we are not all Roman Catholics?
The deacon explains: “Yes, that’s true, the term Roman Catholic was first coined by the Church of England (Anglican Church) as a way of distinguishing between themselves (Anglican Catholics) and the Catholics who followed the pope in Rome (Roman Catholics).”
All Catholics are in communion with Rome and the Pope. However, Roman Catholics are those who pull from a Western tradition – Latin Rite – while Eastern Catholics have various eastern traditions.
3. How many Eastern Catholic Churches are there?
There are 20 different Eastern Catholic Churches, and they total about 16 million members.
4. What is the relationship between the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches?
As stated, two of the Catholic Churches do not have Orthodox counterparts. The reason is that neither the Italo-Albanian Catholic Church nor the Maronite Catholic Church ever broke communion with Rome.
All the other Eastern Catholic Churches follow a similar pattern: they broke communion with Rome at the Great Schism, then at some point broke away from their Orthodox Churches, and returned to full communion with Rome.
In general, Catholics generally see the Eastern Catholics as a bridge between Rome and the Orthodox East; however, the Orthodox have a very negative view of these “break away” churches – “they are no longer ‘graced,’ meaning they have separated themselves from the source of grace, the Orthodox Church.”
The Melkite Catholics actually proposed at one point to have communion with both Rome and Moscow, but that was rejected by both Rome and Moscow. They do however see themselves as a bridge between the two, and they are often the “voice of the Orthodox in Rome.”1
5. Can Eastern Catholic priests be married?
Yes. The answer is a bit more complicated, as different traditions have different standards, but overall the answer is yes. “Once a man has been ordained to the diaconate,” says the Deacon, “he may not marry. However, a married man may be ordained to the priesthood.”
The Eastern Churches pull this tradition from Scripture, where it is clearly stated that St. Peter had a mother-in-law. Moreover, St. Paul specifies that “a man who is being considered for ecclesial office (bishop, priest, deacon) should not have been married more than once. Eventually, the office of bishop was reserved to monastics, which, by definition, meant men who were not married.”
The Latin Church – Roman – “enacted several different laws that, from the latter fourth century, created a celibate priesthood.”
“The basic teaching of the church is that marriage is not an impediment (block) to orders, but rather, that orders is an impediment to marriage.”
The topic of Eastern Catholic Church is a very complicated one with a history of triumph and tragedy. I can assure the Listers that we will be returning to this excellent primer to explore many of the more complex issues.
In the mean time, pray for Christian Unity and learn more about our Eastern brothers and sisters.
Rome & the Eastern Catholic Churches: Though a different question, I do not want to present the Orthodox as the only side that has had problems with the Eastern Catholics. The Eastern Catholics have suffered a “Latinization” over the centuries, which at times was forced. Though their traditions were valid, they were forced into abandoning them for Roman/Latin practices. Moreover, America was one of the worst agents in this tragedy, and the Eastern Catholic Churches in America have a tragic history due to several unfortunate choices by Roman bishops.
I am happy however to note that Vatican II exhorted the Eastern Catholic Churches to reclaim their own traditions. The call of the council has led to a renewal in many Eastern Catholic Churches – including those in the United States. [↩]
What does the Pope actually do? Wouldn’t a Pope hinder my personal relationship with Christ? Why a Pope at all? By Scripture, this list strives to show that the Pope and the Church allow Catholics to simply live according to and love the same Jesus Christ the Apostles knew and loved.
1. What type of kingdom did Christ intend to bring?
Jesus Christ is a descendent of King David and is referred to as “Son of David” in Scripture.1 Christ’s relation to King David is paramount in understanding the fulfillment of his covenant with God. King David was promised a descendent who would “rule forever” and sit on “David’s throne” forever.2 Christ, as the Eternal King, is certainly the descendent of King David’s who will “rule forever” from King David’s throne. During the exiles of Israel, the people wrote with hope about the New Jerusalem and the Messiah that would usher in the New Davidic Kingdom; thus, any conversation about what is and what is not properly intended by Christ, regarding his Kingdom, must be couched within the template of the Davidic Kingdom.3
2. What role did Christ intend for Saint Peter?
In the district of Caesarea Philippi, Christ asks his disciples “Who do men say that the Son of man is?” St. Peter responds, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus then says to St. Peter:
And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
What is Christ’s intention for St. Peter with his Kingdom? On its face, the passage affirms two general truths. First, Christ changes Simon Bar-jona’s name to Peter meaning Rock, the foundation of Christ’s kingdom on earth, the Church. In the Old Testament, God changing someone’s name denoted a special calling, a new vocation, e.g., Abram to Abraham, Sarai to Sarah, Jacob to Israel, etc. St. Peter’s name change denotes that he will have a special vocation among the twelve disciples. Second, St. Peter is given the “keys of kingdom,” which comes with ability to bind and loose.4 It is important to note this is one of the few times Christ ever mentions the “Church.”
3. What is the biblical backing for St. Peter’s role in accordance with the Davidic Kingdom?
If Christ’s Kingdom retains a unique Davidic character, is there any Old Testament evidence that illuminates the keys given to St. Peter? Yes, it is clear that Christ is rewording a passage from Isaiah that speaks of a position within the Davidic Kingdom:
And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. And I will fasten him like a peg in a sure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father’s house.
The similarities in the Old Testament passage are striking. In both passages, a person within the Davidic Kingdom is given keys that come with the authority to open and shut or bind and loose.5
4. What is the position and what is its purpose?
Reading Isaiah 22 and Matthew 16 together, the position or office given to St. Peter appears to be one of a steward or vicar. The vicar is the person who governs in the king’s stead when the king is away. He does not have the authority to change the teachings of the king, but he does have the authority to enforce and clarify them. In King David’s time, this person would rule when David was off to war or some other errand. In our age, the Vicar of Christ, aka the Office of the Papacy, governs the Church according to Christ’s teachings until Christ the King returns for his Kingdom. Notice David’s Vicar has one key to open and close the earthly kingdom, but Christ’s Vicar has two keys: one for heaven and one for earth.
5. What does the Catechism of the Catholic Church say about St. Peter and the Papacy?
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches:
882. “The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter’s successor, ‘is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful.’ ‘For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.'”
6. Is there a distinction between Petros and Petra?
A popular grammatical question on the Matthew passage often takes the form of the following: But in Greek, St. Peter’s name is Petros and Christ says, “upon this petra,” so Christ was not referring to St. Peter, was he? First, note that the premise of this question is that for over two thousand years, the Office of the Papacy has been founded upon a missed nuance in Greek grammar that no one apparently noticed, including those Early Church Christians who spoke and wrote in ancient Greek.
A few thoughts. First, while the Gospel is written in Greek, Christ arguably spoke Aramaic; thus, “You are kepha and on this kepha I will build my Church.” It’s the same word. Furthermore, St. Peter is referred to as Cephas, meaning Rock throughout the New Testament.6 The distinction in Greek is slightly more nuanced.
Greek is an inflected (not “reflexive”) language, which means that the forms of nouns change based on the function a word is performing in a sentence. When this happens, the base meaning of the word remains the same. The inflection communicates information about how the word is being used grammatically but not what it means.
In the case of petros vs. petra, the change is not an inflection. Petros and petra are two different words in Greek. They are similar because they are cognates (just as “president” and “presider” are cognates in English but are nonetheless two different words with different, though related, meanings). Because they are two different words, the inflection (change of form) of petros and petra is not what is at issue here. The basic meanings of the terms is.
The point the article is making is that in Attic Greek there was a slight difference in meaning between the two, but in Koine Greek (the dialect of the New Testament) they were synonyms.
Petros and petra are two distinct words, but without a distinction in meaning. The grammatical distinction does not import any error on the historical understanding that St. Peter is the Rock referred to in St. Matthew’s passage.7
7. Is not Christ The Rock?
There are two general arguments here. First, that Christ alone bears the title The Rock; thus, it is not appropriate to grant that title to St. Peter. Second, that the passage in Matthew 16 is referring to Christ as the Rock of the Church.
First, Christ is not the only person to hold the title/name Rock. Christ is referred to as the Rock, because he is the foundation of all things; however, in the rabbinical tradition, Abraham also bore the title Rock. Isaiah 51:1-3 states, “Look to the rock from which you were hewn… look to Abraham your father.” Cardinal Ratzinger comments on the similarity between St. Peter and Abraham as Rock:
Abraham, the father of faith, is by his faith the rock that holds back chaos, the onrushing primordial flood of destruction, and thus sustains creation. Simon, the first to confess Jesus as the Christ and the first witness of the Resurrection, now becomes by virtue of his Abrahamic faith, which is renewed in Christ, the rock that stands against the impure tide of unbelief and its destruction of man.8
Christ retains the name The Rock, but both Abraham and St. Peter have carried the title Rock as well. Regarding, the St. Matthew passage, it was Jesus Christ who named Simon Bar-Jona, Peter, the Rock. It would not make any sense for Christ to name St. Peter Rock and then be – without any contextual clues of a transition – be referring to himself as the Rock upon which he will build his Church. The entire context of the passage focuses on Peter: his name is changed, he is explicitly given the keys, and his authority is explained. There is no grammatical reason why Christ would be referring to himself in the passage, especially since, again, it was he who changed Peter’s name.
The following considerations are meant to intuit certain protestant hesitancies that are common when discussing the biblical foundation of the papacy.
8. How can I follow both Christ and the Pope?
If the papacy is properly understood, as defined by the Catholic Church, then to be obedient to Christ is to follow the Pope and to follow the Pope is to have confidence in one’s understanding of Christ. Imagine a citizen of King David’s saying, “I am a citizen of King David’s Kingdom, but I will not obey his Vicar.” The statement makes little sense, as the Vicar is selected by the King and governs according to the King’s laws. The Vicar is nothing in and of himself. The Vicar always points to the King. The Pope always points to Christ. Cardinal Ratzinger taught that the pope was the “Advocate of Christian Memory.” He holds the People of God to the memory of Christ and his teachings, the identity of the community.
In short, the Pope holds the King’s people to the King’s laws while the King is away. He is the Rock upon which the King has built his Church and has been given the keys of authority.
9. Is the Pope a middleman between us and God?
Protestants often lament that the Pope is a middleman between Catholics and God, which in turn distorts the ability of a Catholic to have a “personal relationship with God.” Unlike King David’s Kingdom, though our King Jesus Christ is gone, we can still communicate with him, embrace his true presence in the Eucharist, and have a personal relationship with him. It is painfully obvious, however, in our modern world that the concept of a “personal relationship with Christ” has spun wildly out of control. With each generation, Protestant pastors attempt to reinvent the Christian religion by dogmatically projecting their personal experiences onto others. They form new “churches” upon their new understanding of Christ and Christianity. Across the board, “personal relationship with Christ” is in truth a personalized Jesus. Jesus becomes simply a concept to be molding to this or that individual’s beliefs.
The Protestant Reformation splintered the Church and the Protestants have been splintering ever since. Everyone claims their own version of Christ, and with no perceived Christ-given-authority to rule what is true and what is false. “Churches” split and Christians are divided. The Pope exists to purify, guide, and defend the Church’s relationship with Jesus Christ. The unified Church under the Pope – the Advocate of Christian Memory – holds the Church to the teachings of Christ and his apostles. He is a bulwark preventing Catholics from drifting off into the fads and ideologies of the age.
In essence, the Catholic life is one about living the Christ-centered life. It is not a life spent wondering whether or not this teaching of Christ or that new “church” is right or not. The Pope frees Catholics from worrying what is the Christian life, to simply living the Christian life.
10. What does Christ want for his Church?
Assuming all that has already been addressed, there is one specific prayer of Christ that contextualizes the greater conversation of one unified Church. In the Gospel of John, the 17th chapter is arguably the central passage of the entire New Testament and one of the most underestimated passages as well. The chapter is Christ’s prayer for his Church. Toward the end of the passage, Christ focuses on unity:
That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to them; that they may be one, as we also are one: I in them, and thou in me; that they may be made perfect in one: and the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast also loved me. Father, I will that where I am, they also whom thou hast given me may be with me; that they may see my glory which thou hast given me, because thou hast loved me before the creation of the world. Just Father, the world hath not known thee; but I have known thee: and these have known that thou hast sent me.
Christ’s prayer for the Church begs certain questions from those who call themselves Christians: does the perpetual fracturing of one protestant group into another resemble the unity of Christ’s prayer? Does the infighting and strife of broken communities show the world Christ was really the Son of God? Do thousands upon thousands of contradictory Christian communities lend belief to the fact the one true God came to earth? The way Christianity is currently lived in the world promotes the belief that charity may be separated from unity. The God’s charity and God’s unity may be divorced.9
There are other questions that may be asked of God. Did Christ come and establish a community with no authority to guide it? Did Christ come and give us the truth without any way to confirm it? Did Christ come and preach unity and charity only to leave humanity to fracture and break under sin into thousands of contradictory communities? Did Christ come and bring humanity The Word only to have no authority to interpret it? No. He brought a Kingdom and a Kingdom structure. The Office of the Papacy unites us in one Church, one God, one Christ, and one Truth.
The Papacy does not replace Christ or stand as a threat to a personal relationship with Christ, but rather the Papacy is a means of purifying a Catholic’s personal relationship. Followers of Christ should not be forced their whole life to wonder what is and what is not Christianity. There is no need to reinvent or rediscover the faith in every generation. The Pope and the Church allow Catholics to simply live by and love the same Jesus Christ the Apostles knew and loved.
The Pope holds the King’s people to the King’s laws, so, in fulfillment of Christ’s prayer for the Church, the People of God may show the world Jesus Christ by their unity and charity.
Son of David: Matt 1:1-2; 9:27-29; Mk 10:47, 48 [↩]
King David’s Throne: I Chron 17:14; Ps 89:35-36; Luke1:31 [↩]
David’s Kingdom: Is. 9:6-7; 11:1-3; Jer 33:14-15, 17, 19-21, 26; Ps 132:10-14, 17; Luke 1:31-33, 68-71; II Tim 2:8; Rev 5:5, 22:16; Rom 1:3 [↩]
Keys in the Old Testament: The verse is Isaiah 22:22, but the entire passage is notable for discerning the vocation of St. Peter. For instance, the passage is actually taking the keys from one steward to the next. This detail is often used to combat those Protestant circles who affirm St. Peter had a unique role, but argue the role died with he died. [↩]
Cephas in the New Testament: cf. John 1:42; I Cor 1:12, 3:22, 9:5 [↩]
Petros/Petra: The explanation is taken from the article Petros v. Petra by Jimmy Akin. Another article consulted was the Catholic Answers article Peter the Rock. SPL had previously held that the petros/petra was one of inflection and corrected this mistake during an update. Updated: 3/3/14 [↩]
Abraham/Peter Rock: Quote taken from Called to Communion, Cardinal Ratzinger, Ignatius Press, p. 56. [↩]
“Prince of the Apostles” means that St. Peter held a certain primacy over the other eleven. Understanding St. Peter’s unique position among the twelve and the unique ministries he exercised lays an excellent groundwork for a discussion of Christ’s founding of the Papacy.
Listers, “Prince of the Apostles” means that St. Peter held a certain primacy over the other eleven. Understanding St. Peter’s unique position among the twelve and the unique ministries he exercised lays an excellent groundwork for a discussion of Christ’s founding of the Papacy. While resources on this subject are abundant, SPL recommends Cardinal Ratzinger’s Called to Communion.
St. Peter’s Place of Primacy Among the Twelve
1. St. Peter & the Sons of Zebedee:
Sts. Peter, James, and John are a special group of disciples that are allowed to witness the Transfiguration1 and accompany Christ to the Mount of Olives.2 In each event, St. Peter, the Rock, is singled out. At the Mount of Olives, Christ finds all three asleep, but it is St. Peter he addresses. During the Transfiguration, it is St. Peter who speaks for the disciples.
2. Christ Calls Simon Peter First:
In St. Luke 5:1-11, Christ calls his first disciples, and the first is Simon Peter. According to Cardinal Ratzinger, the “call of Peter appears as the original pattern of apostolic vocation par excellence.”3
3. The List of Disciples According to Scripture:
Every time the disciples are listed, St. Peter is listed first.4 Furthermore, when referring to the disciples, sometimes only St. Peter is mentioned by name, e.g., “And Simon and those who were with him,” and “Now Peter and those who were with him”.5
4. Unique Acts:
St. Peter is the only one to try to walk on the water (Mt 14:28ff) and he is the one that brings up the famous question of how many times we must forgive.6 Even St. Peter’s shadow was an instrument of healing.7
The Name Change: The Rock
5. The Changing of St. Peter’s Name:
While it was common for Rabbis to give nicknames or new surnames to their disciples, e.g., the Sons of Zebedee as the “Sons of Thunder,” it was uncommon to change a disciple’s first name. Christ gives Simon the new name “Peter” or Kephas (or Cephas) meaning rock.8
6. New Name = New Vocation:
In the Old Testament, God changing someone’s name denoted a special calling, a new vocation, e.g., Abram to Abraham, Sarai to Sarah, Jacob to Israel, etc. St. Peter’s name change denotes that he will have a special vocation among the twelve.
7. Special Meaning of Rock:
Obviously Christ was also referred to as the Rock, because he is the foundation of all things. However, in the rabbinical tradition, Abraham was also referred to as a rock: “Look to the rock from which you were hewn… look to Abraham your father” .9 Cardinal Ratzinger comments:10
Abraham, the father of faith, is by his faith the rock that holds back chaos, the onrushing primordial flood of destruction, and thus sustains creation. Simon, the first to confess Jesus as the Christ and the first witness of the Resurrection, now becomes by virtue of his Abrahamic faith, which is renewed in Christ, the rock that stands against the impure tide of unbelief and its destruction of man.
8. The Risen Christ Commissions St. Peter:
After the Resurrection, Christ appears to the Twelve and has a unique conversation with St. Peter. Christ, the Shepherd, asks St. Peter three times if he loves him. St. Peter responds yes all three times – presumably this passage should reflect his three denials. Christ also tell St. Peter and Peter alone: feed my lambs, tend my sheep, and feed my sheep. As the Vicar of Christ, St. Peter must care for the flock.11
9. Christ Prays for St. Peter:
In Lk 22:31-34, two major Petrine themes are evident. First, Satan has taken a special interest in St. Peter. He will fail, but will repent. Second, after St. Peter has “turned again” to Christ, Jesus commissions him to “strengthen the brethren.” Another mission given only to St. Peter.
10. The Keys:
In Matthew 16:13-20, the most famous unique call is given to St. Peter: to be the foundation of the Church and to exercise the authority of keys of the kingdom. The office given to St. Peter is that of the Vicar within the Davidic Kingdom. The Vicar governs in the King’s stead, according to the King’s rules, while the King is gone.12 St. Peter is the Vicar of Christ, the Pope.
St. Peter & St. Paul
11. St. Paul Refers to Peter as Cephas:
St. Paul introduces St. Peter as the first witness of the Resurrection: “that [Christ] was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve” (I Cor 15:3-5; cf. 1:12, 3:22, 9:5). St. Paul refers to Peter as Cephas, emphasizing his name change and vocation.
12. St. Paul Presents Himself to Cephas:
The epistle of Galatians is paramount in understanding the Pauline/Petrine relationship. In the beginning of Galatians, St. Paul is attempting to validate his claim to be an apostle, though he was not one of the twelve. It’s important to note that St. Paul invokes Cephas twice to show that his vocation and apostolic claim are both valid. After receiving his call from Christ, St. Paul goes out and “does not confer with flesh and blood,” but rather three years later goes “to Jerusalem to visit Cephas.” Then after fourteen years, he returns to Jerusalem and privately tells the “pillars” of the Church his gospel, “lest somehow I should be running or had run in vain.” Again, he uses St. Peter as vindication, saying as Peter went to the circumcised, so he, Paul, goes to the uncircumcised. Then the “pillars” (Cephas, James, and John) “perceive the grace” in St. Paul and send him to the Gentiles with Barnabas. (Gal 1) It is important to note the role of hierarchy within St. Paul’s ministry, not only in validating his own role, but later in establishing his own hierarchal churches (cf. Timothy and Titus).
13. St. Paul Rebukes St. Peter:
A lot of ink has been spilled over this passage. First let us see that St. Paul had to show he had been validated by St. Peter in Gal 1 in order for people to accept his authority to then correct St. Peter in Gal 2. Furthermore, St. Peter’s primacy in the Church does not mean he is incapable of personal error or sin. St. Peter is also the apostle who denied Christ three times. The Popes confess their sins like every other Catholic, it is the office they hold that sets them apart.