the rock upon which Christ built His church

[melinky]

"And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it."?
(Matt. 16:18, NIV)

I don't have all of the references some of you have, nor do I have any real knowledge of Greek or Latin, in fact I can only guess if a word is Latin or Greek; they all tend to look Latin to me, most likely because of the years singing Latin in choir. So my question is this:

It is my understanding, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that in this passage, the RCC understands the word "rock" to refer to Peter, whereas, the Protestant traditions understand the word "rock" to refer to Christ.

I've looked at several translations to see if this translation is done from a Protestant point of view, but they all read about the same. I'd like to discuss our understandings of this scripture.

Yours in Christ,

Melinda

[rgrove]

The argument that came from the leaders of the Reformation to be that the "rock" is Peter's confession. Christ will build upon that "rock", that is the confession of Jesus as the Messiah who was to come. I refer you to the defining document of the Reformation penned primarily by Phillip Melanchthon (Luther's right hand man and leader of Lutheran church after Luther's demise), but with the council of some of the signers of the document as well, regarding the Protestant position on the Papacy. It was written in 1537 at Smallcald and is called "Of the Power and Primacy of the Pope". The whole thing can be read at:

www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/concord/web/smc-pope.html

The clearest statement to answer your original question is this quote:

"However, as to the declaration: Upon this rock I will build My Church, certainly the Church has not been built upon the authority of man, but upon the ministry of the confession which Peter made, in which he proclaims that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God."

Take a look at the signatories as well. Martin Bucer was a signer and Smalcald was a major Reformation event.

Yours In Christ,
Ron

Added later - I would also note that the current RCC teaching is contradicted by virtually all of the early church fathers that directly addressed this portion of scripture. For instance Augustine said:

But whom say ye that I am? Peter answered, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ One for many gave the answer, Unity in many. Then said the Lord to him, ‘Blessed art thou, Simon Barjonas: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven.’ Then He added, ‘and I say unto thee.’ As if He had said, ‘Because thou hast said unto Me, ‘Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God,” I also say unto thee, ‘Thou art Peter.” For before he was called Simon. Now this name of Peter was given him by the Lord, and in a figure, that he should signify the Church. For seeing that Christ is the rock (petra), Peter is the Christian people. For the rock (petra) is the original name. Therefore Peter is so called from the rock; not the rock from Peter; as Christ is not called Christ from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. ‘Therefore,’ he saith, ‘Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock’ which thou hast confessed, upon this rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, will I build My Church;’ that is upon Myself, the Son of the Living God, ‘will I build My Church.’ I will build thee upon Myself, not Myself upon Thee.

More early church quotes may be found in this article:
www.the-highway.com/papacy_Webster.html

Here's a good section in that article because Chrysostom is a major, major early church father:

What has been said of the Latin Fathers can be said equally of those from the East. For example, Chrysostom is typical when he refers to Peter as the ‘leader of the apostles’ (On the Inscription of the Acts, II) and ‘head of the choir’ (Homily 88 on John) and yet he does not interpret the rock of Matthew 16:18 in the Roman Catholic sense.16 Chrysostom argues that the rock is not the person of Peter, but Peter’s confession of faith in Christ to be the Son of God. And, like Ambrose, he says that where Peter is, there is the Church in the sense of Peter’s confession: ‘Though we do not retain the body of Peter, we do retain the faith of Peter, and retaining the faith of Peter we have Peter.’17

[L4E_WakaMol-King]

That's a good passage to discuss considering recent events with Rome.

Obviously, that passage has special import for Catholics. This is my understanding: Peter was established as a leader among the apostles. The apostles became the first "bishops," if you can use that term. As the apostles founded communities and as they died, they appointed successors to carry on their mission in their authority. Since Peter was a leader among the apostles, and since he is traditionally believed to have settled in Rome, his successors, the bishops of Rome (Popes) were (and are currently) leaders among the bishops.

I agree that Christ is not built upon Peter, but that Peter is built on Christ. However, I believe that Christ did pass on a type of leadership authority to Peter. To put it bluntly, Peter is built on Christ, and Christ's will was that we be built off of Peter. Therefore, to be built off of Peter is to follow the will or Christ.

I think the idea of a Pope also has a very practical purpose. In today's world, the Bible and early church writings are available to just about anyone, but that was not always the case. With information not readily available in the ancient world, having a centralized authority was important for maintaining the church's teachings. Having a Pope is still practical today, though a little less so, for obvious organizational and unitive purposes.