Postscripts From The Catholic Spitfire Grill

I asked because it's one of the MANY things going on in that passage that we tend to blip right over. This passage of scripture has a lot going on in it that we tend to trip right over because we just don't have the cultural glasses to read it with. And when I look at ALL of the details, the idea that Jesus is building anything on Peter's statement of faith and not Peter himself, makes no sense to me whatsoever. It's a dense DENSE passage and it calls on the symbolism of the place in which it was delivered, the culture in which Jesus was speaking, the symbolism of the Old Testament, as well as other things that Jesus said and did right after this happened to grasp just how firmly and thoroughly Jesus was making His point here.

When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi

You don't just go to Caesarea Philippi from Galilee. It is a two-day journey deep in to Gentile territory. Jesus and his disciples would be considered ritually unclean because of their journey there and thus, it was not a journey to be taken lightly. In chapter 16 we see Jesus talking to the Pharisees and Saducees so He was obviously not in gentile territory right before this took place and nothing but this encounter with Peter is recorded as having taken place in Caesarea Philippi; therefore, Sacred Scripture seems to imply that Jesus went to this place expressly for the purpose of having this talk with his disciples at the foot of a huge rock.

Here is a picture of Caesarea Philippi:



At the top of this rock was a temple built by Herod in honor of Caesar. The rock itself was the site of the pagan worship of Pan who was the pagan god of sheep and shepherds. At the base of the rock is a huge cavern that at the time was considered bottomless. Human sacrifices were thrown into the cavern and the pagans called this place the “gates of death.” The rock is also the headwaters of the Jordan River.

he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" They replied, "Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Simon Peter said in reply, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah.

Ok here we see the reference to Peter being the son of Jonah. In the culture of the time, names and relationships are very important and always in scripture if God is changing a name it is a signal of something extremely important.

So if Peter is the biological son of John, why is Jesus calling him the “son of Jonah”?

The key to this is in Matthew 12

Jesus is the sign of Jonah the prophet. And Peter is the “son of Jonah.” This is a statement of inheritance. Jesus is designating Peter as his heir. All by itself this might not mean anything, but it is one more intensifier to a passage that is deeply layered.

Jesus goes on…

For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.

Peter has received a revelation from God!

Joseph became the steward of the Kingdom and the head of his 11 other brothers because he also received a revelation from God and nothing was withheld from him except the throne itself. One Protestant commentator (The Pentateuch vol. 1 Commentary on the Old Testament; Kyle and Delitzsch; page 352 as cited in Upon This Rock has even described Joseph as receiving the “gift of infallible interpretation from God” (Which is a pretty good understanding of what Catholics believe Papal infallibility to be.)

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

In English we totally lose the wordplay here, so it’s important to consider how this passage would have sounded as Jesus said it in Aramaic.

And so I say to you, you are Kepha and on this Kepha I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

The Aramaic, unlike the English, does not leave any room for wiggle room on the antecedants. Jesus is talking about Peter and not Peter’s statement of faith.

Jesus not only continues changing Peter’s name from Simon barJohn to Kepha barJonah; He is setting up an immense visual parallel here. Jesus the True Shepherd is standing at the base of this huge rock with a false church and the center of worship to the false god of sheep and shepherds with a pitiful mockery of the actual gates of death at the base and saying in effect to Kepha barJonah, “You are going to be bigger than this that you see right here. I, the True Shepherd, will build the True Church on you where there will be True Worship not like this false temple where they worship the false god with false worship. Through you will come the source of the True Living Water (remember that this was the headwaters of the Jordan) and the actual gates of hell and not this pathetic mockery of them….will not prevail!!”

But He’s not done yet…there is more…

I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.

What about the keys? Well remember that the apostles were steeped in the Old Testament. What do the keys represent in the Old Testament? That’s in Isaiah 22

The King at the time of this passage is Hezekiah and his house steward/palace administrator is Eliakim. The office of palace administrator was one of great prestige and extreme power. It is similar to the kind of authority exercised by Joseph in Egypt (Genesis 41:39-40) AND the office of palace administrator passed in a parallel line to that of the King. In other words, the authority was passed down from generation to generation. I believe that Jesus is clearly referencing this passage in Isaiah with himself and the King and Peter is the palace administrator. The keys show up again in Revelation 3:7 when Jesus returns and the office of stewardship of Christ's church on earth ends.

But Jesus is STILL not done. Just like in John 6, when He repeats and confirms the literal meaning of his words regarding the Eucharist to make sure that nobody misunderstands, He is doing the same thing here. And really given the significance of what He is saying, that is to be expected.

Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven

Additionally it is important to understand Jesus' words in context of rabbinical terms because that is how the Apostles were most likely to understand the meaning of what Jesus had told them.

I can't say for sure, but I suspect Zondervan does not publish any Catholic books so the above comes from a Protestant commentary. In any case I think the meaning of this passage goes far beyond antecedents of ‘this rock.’ I think it is as important to look for OT context as well as the Jewish cultural context to a more complete understanding of the symbol of the keys that Jesus used. I highly recommend the book Jesus, Peter and the Keys: A Scriptural Handbook on the Papacy for an exhaustive study of the topic from the Catholic perspective as well as Upon This Rock. (And lest you think that Catholic perspective means an intellectually incestuous-type work by referencing only Catholic scholars and works, it is significantly referenced to Protestant primary sources and reference materials!)

Finally, this passage is wrapped up with this statement.

Then he strictly ordered his disciples to tell no one that he was the Messiah. From that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer greatly from the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed and on the third day be raised.

This marks the beginning of Jesus’ active preparation for death which further reinforces the idea that Jesus is bequeathing something here to Peter that is reflected in calling him Kepha barJonah.

That’s my Catholic understanding of the passage and why I believe that calling Peter the “son of Jonah” is significant.