Skip to main contentAccessibility feedback

The One Who Serves

In a number of places in Scripture, the apostles argue who among them is the “greatest,” “first” or the “leader.” These disputes are often served up by opponents of Catholicism as proof against the Catholic doctrine of papal primacy. For instance, Protestant writer James White claims in his book The Roman Catholic Controversy that in such chapters as Luke 22 “the Gospels themselves deny that any of the apostles held a position of primacy” (108).

Let’s look at the Gospel passage in question: “A dispute also arose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest. And he said to them, ‘The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors. But not so with you; rather let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves. For which is greater, one who sits at table or one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at table? But I am among you as the one who serves’” (Luke 22:24–27).

From this passage, White produces three objections to the Petrine primacy. (1) The apostles would not have argued among themselves if they had understood that Christ had already bestowed the primacy upon Peter. (2) The Lord would have rebuked the apostles for failing to recognize this primacy. (3) Jesus would have taken the occasion to remind the apostles of this primacy. Let’s consider each of these objections.

The apostles would not have argued if they had understood there to be a primacy.

White says that “in light of the recurring arguments about who would be the greatest, it does not seem that the disciples understood the words of Matthew 16 to establish Peter as the foundation of the Church, the first pope, the vicar of Christ on earth” (RCC, 109).

Even if White’s observation were true, it would not prove the Lord, notwithstanding the apostles’ lack of understanding, didn’t intend his declaration to Peter to establish a primacy. After all, it is evident from Scripture that the apostles often misunderstood or understood only imperfectly the Lord’s meaning about many things—e.g., his impending death and Resurrection. When Jesus washed the apostles’ feet, he told Peter, “What I am doing you do not know now, but afterward you will understand” (John 13:7).

In Matthew 16:18–21, the Lord’s words to Peter were a promise of things yet to come regarding a Church being built upon Peter. It is difficult to imagine how the apostles or anyone could have comprehended sufficiently what the Lord intended at the time he spoke these words. Indeed, the later dispute in Luke 22—”later” if we assume this Lucan passage follows Matthew 16 temporally, which is not at all certain—demonstrates the apostles misunderstood the nature of his kingdom. Only when the Lord commissioned Peter to “strengthen your brethren” (Luke 22:32) and “feed my sheep” (John 21:17) and the Holy Spirit descended at Pentecost did the Lord’s intention become clear.

The Lord would have rebuked the apostles for failing to recognize Peter’s primacy.

This objection is more easily be turned back on the objector. It is evident the apostles’ themselves presupposed one among them ought to be considered “greatest,” the “leader,” or “first.” The argument, after all, was over who was the greatest, not whether there was a greatest.

One could as easily ask, “Where does the Lord rebuke the apostles for thinking there was a primacy in the first place?” If Jesus did not intend for there to be any primacy among the apostles, the surest way to end the dispute would have been for him to say something like, “None of you twelve are greater than the others in authority.” Nowhere does the Lord make such a rebuke. White’s argument reduces Christ’s words to nonsense, as it requires Jesus to deny the very thing he was asserting: “Let the greatest among you—of which, by the way, there is none—become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves.”

The truth is, the Lord’s response presupposed a primacy, as is adduced by his calling the leader “as one who serves.” Jesus corrected only the apostles’ imperfect understanding of how authority in the Church was to be exercised. It was not to be exercised to make others one’s servants, after the manner of earthly kings; rather, the “leader” must serve the needs of all. Far from being a denial of the primacy, the Lord’s words in Luke 22 constitute a blueprint of how primacy is to be exercised in the Church. 

The Lord would have reminded the apostles Peter was “chief.” 

White writes that Jesus “treats all the disciples alike and speaks of conferring on them all—not on Peter alone—a kingdom in which they would judge the twelve tribes of Israel” (RCC, p. 109). However, a closer examination reveals Jesus did not “treat all the disciples alike.” In fact, he did the very thing White says he did not do: He reminded the apostles of Peter’s primacy. While Jesus assuaged the jealousies that gave rise to the dispute by assuring the apostles that each would have authority within his kingdom (cf. Luke 22:28–30), he proceeded to single out Peter from the other apostles:

“Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you [the Greek here is plural, referring to all the apostles), that he might sift you [plural] like wheat, but I have prayed for you [the Greek here is singular, referring to Peter specifically] that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren” (Luke 22:31–32).

The Lord—in plain view of the other apostles—treats Peter differently. Satan demanded to have all the apostles, but Jesus prayed for Peter specifically, that his faith not fail—conferring upon him alone the role of strengthening the brethren, including the other apostles. “Strengthen[ing] the brethren” is the essence of the type of primacy outlined by Christ in the preceding verses where he said, “Let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves.” Peter, made strengthener of all—servant of all—by God himself, is to be the “leader”—the “greatest”—among the apostles.

The same Simon whose faith won him the name “rock” (Matthew 16:18)—and upon whom the Lord promised to build his Church, against which hell will not prevail—received divine protection of his faith for the purpose of strengthening the brethren.

White rejects such a notion, claiming the Lord prayed for Peter because he “more obviously than any of the other disciples would dishonor his Lord that evening in betrayal” and that he “needed pastoral care by the Lord due to his impetuosity” (RCC, 115).

However, such interpretations are incomplete, and the objections based upon them are hardly compelling. Clearly, the Lord’s prayer was not for Peter only, but was intended to be a gift to the brethren (i.e., the rest of the Church) who were to benefit from Peter’s unfailing faith. It is no wonder then that Pope Gregory the Great (A.D. 590–604) sees in Luke 22:31–32, as well as in other Petrine passages, that it is “apparent that by the Lord’s voice the care of the whole Church was committed” to Peter (Register of the Epistles 5:20).

It is, after all, through Peter that the Church’s faith is strengthened as outlined by Pope Leo the Great (440–461): “All [the apostles] equally needed the help of divine protection, since the devil wanted to harass them all and to crush them all. Still, the Lord took special care of Peter and prayed especially for Peter. It was as if the condition of the others would be more secure if the mind of their leader were not overcome. In Peter, therefore, the fortitude of all is reinforced, for the aid of divine grace is ordered in such a way that the firmness given to Peter through Christ is conferred upon the apostles through Peter” (Sermon 4, 3).

It is evident that the arguments among the apostles offer no proof against the Catholic doctrines of papal primacy and infallibility. Rather, verses such as those found in Luke 22 support these doctrines, as demonstrated by the following facts:

The Lord interrupted an argument among the apostles over who was the “greatest.” Christ neither implicitly nor explicitly rejected the premise of the argument that there is a primacy; rather, the premise was affirmed by implication in Christ’s elucidation of how the “greatest” must act. What the apostles failed to understand was not the fact of the primacy but rather the nature and purpose of it. It is this misunderstanding the Lord corrected by explaining “the leader [must become] as one who serves” (Luke 22:26).

Then, having mollified the apostles’ concerns over their own place of authority in his kingdom (Luke 22:28–30), Jesus proceeded to pray for Peter specifically, that his “faith may not fail,” and commanded him to “strengthen your brethren” (Luke 22:32).

This Petrine office has continued to this day in the office of the bishop of Rome. Like the wise man of Matthew 7, the Lord built his house, the Church, upon the rock that was Simon Peter; whose faith was made unfailing by the Lord. And this Church, confirmed by Peter and his successors, will never be swept away by the storms of heresy.

Did you like this content? Please help keep us ad-free
Enjoying this content?  Please support our mission!Donatewww.catholic.com/support-us