Jesus’ famous play on words “You are Peter and on this rock I will build my church” (Peter and rock are the same word in Aramaic) has always been seen as the basis for papal authority.
It’s not very clear what Jesus had in mind when he referred to “his church” – the concept is so familiar to us that it’s difficult to realize that in Jesus’ time there was no such thing as a “church”. What we now think of as the church came into existence over many centuries and continues to evolve. However it is clear that Peter was considered from the beginning as the first of the apostles and his position and authority has been passed on to all subsequent popes – even if what a pope was thought to be has also changed dramatically over time.
What is also clear, but more likely to be overlooked, is that throughout the Bible there is a very ambivalent attitude towards authority – at least human authority. Divine authority is unquestioned. The issue is what is the relationship between the two. Only 3 sentences after the passage we hear today in Matthew’s gospel, Jesus says to Peter: “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me.” Hardly a ringing endorsement of the person he has just chosen as the leader to follow after him!
The Hebrew Scriptures also have a very mixed opinion of authority, particularly when it comes to the Kings of Israel. Some commentary, particularly about David, is positive. But it is also balanced with severe criticism. Most of the later kings were not regarded favorably and in many cases were in open conflict with prophets. Overall the Old Testament writers seem to have considered Kings more of a problem than an advantage for the “chosen people”. Even Eliakim who is given the authority of the keys in Isaiah’s prophecy turned out to be a disappointment and there is an epilog to the story in which “the peg” is broken. We also know that since Peter, Popes have been a very mixed bunch – as you will have seen, even if in rather lurid terms, if you have been watching recent TV shows about Borgias and Medicis.
Maybe the problem here is that Jesus wasn’t choosing a leader of a church as we think of it. His idea of “building his church” isn’t based on organizational skills, leadership profile, consistency, and authority. Jesus wasn’t selecting a CEO, or a Prime Minister, or even a Bishop.
So what was really going on here? What is it that Peter did to cause Jesus to refer to him as a rock?
Peter recognized Jesus as the Son of God. Peter is a rock because he understands the relationship between Jesus and the Father, and therefore is able to participate in this relationship.
We are also part of this relationship. We are the church to which Jesus was referring. As the Second Vatican Council emphasized – the church is a group of people, not an organization. We are built on Peter. We stand on the foundations he formed, foundations containing all the failure, contradictions, courage and determination that we see in Peter.
As Jesus notes, Peter didn’t achieve anything by his own effort. He was able to make his declaration of faith because God helped him. God continued to help Peter through all the difficulties that followed, even when he totally flaked out. That’s why we are founded on Peter – not because of Peter, but because of the power of God working through him. Really there is no human authority. The only authority is God’s, and we try to follow it, standing on Peter’s shoulders, as best we can.