
Greek Orthodox Patrology: An Introduction to the Study of the Church Fathers

Saint Athanasiius of Alexandria: Original Research and New Perspectives
|
"Depart
from me, for I am
a sinful man, O Lord" (Luke 5:8)
When
we speak about the Apostle Peter, our mind usually goes to the plethoric
and dynamic Apostle, who stood out among the Twelve as 'the head Apostle'.
For we remember how often we see him from within the sacred texts, being
the leader in various activities, acting also on behalf of the rest of
the Apostles, yet without separating himself from them.
For instance, Christ asks "Who do men say that the Son of
man is?" and Peter immediately hastens to speak out, on behalf of
all, that blessed confession: "You are the Christ, the Son of the
Living God". For this reason it was only natural that he receive
thereafter, again on behalf of his fellow-Apostles, Christ's beatitude,
which was addressed to the believers of all times: "Blessed are you,
Simon Bar Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but
my Father who is in heaven" (Mat. 16:17).
The disciples see Judas coming with the band of soldiers in order
to arrest Jesus, and again it is Peter who draws his knife and cuts the
right ear of Malchus, who was the high priest's slave (cf. John 18:10).
Such kind of spontaneity and dynamism by Peter explains why Christ
usually addresses this Apostle either to ask "Do you love me?"
and to project his example as the characteristic case of human weakness,
or even to scold him bitterly, as in the case when he was obliged to call
him "Satan" (cf. Mat. 16:23).
We should admit that, whether he is frightened for a moment and
denies Christ in the courtyard of the high priest or whether he repents
a little later and "went out and wept bitterly" (Mat. 26:75),
the brave Peter gives us the most living picture of a man who cannot live
below his level or pretend. He is full of blood and flesh, but also full
of fire and enthusiasm. It is for this reason that he deposits every minute
his human weakness and contradictory character, as well as all the power
and beauty of his truth.
One would expect such a type of man to become the image of Christians
of the East, and, yet, it was not so. Surely in the official worship of
our Church and in our theology we have done no injustice at all to the
Apostle Peter. Being always deeply conscious of the fact that he is the
brother of our Andrew the first-called and Patron Saint of Constantinople,
we accord a special place to the Catholic Epistles of St Peter by making
them the main Reading at the Festive Vespers on the Patronal Feast of
the Apostle Andrew.
Yet, in the wider conscience of the Orthodox people the Apostle
Peter is surely done injustice. Suffice it to consider that we hardly
have anywhere in the world a Church dedicated to the head of the Apostles.
And even in the case where we have a Church dedicated to the memory of
Peter and Paul, our people call it "the Church of St Paul".
The explanation for this 'injustice' is not hard at all. From the
time when the West wanted to project the Apostle Peter to the point of
exaggeration as ‘Prince of the Apostles' and to regard himself — and not
his blessed confession — as the foundation of the entire Church, it rendered
him a stranger to the East. And when at a later stage the Pope of Rome
tried to support the Papal Primacy and infallibility by the supposition
that Peter also had these privileges, and that he transferred them exclusively
to the Bishop of Rome, it was only natural that the estrangement should
also develop into an intense antipathy, which would be fatally reflected
in the sacred person of the Apostle Peter, even though the latter is not
at all responsible for the said fabrication of Rome.
Precisely for this reason it is time that we read again carefully
whatever is relevant to the Apostle Peter in the New Testament, so that
we may be able to relive the authentic Apostle of the Faith, of prayer,
of action and of repentance.
Among the many passages that describe characteristic aspects of
St Peter's life, the most moving is neither his confession at Caesaria
of Philippi, which we have already mentioned, nor his bitter tears after
the momentary betrayal at the courtyard of the high priest. For both the
confession and the repentance were within the immediate logic of things
for all the Apostles who lived the mystery of the direct presence of the
God-Man. What was beyond this "logic of things", which constitutes
perhaps the even more moving biographical element of St Peter, is the
fact that at a certain time he felt his unworthiness to humiliate him.
And he was not at all ashamed to declare it before Christ, thus making
it a landmark of humility for all times. It was the moment when he saw
the Teacher to work wonders even on the illogical nature by filling the
nets with fish precisely where there was no fish a little before. And
it was not the first time he saw Jesus perform miracles and doing good
for people: making paralytics to walk, blind men to see again, dead people
to rise.
However, in the sight of these great and unheard of miracles St
Peter stands with awe and wonder, just as the other disciples also do,
yet there is no mention here Of contrition and sense of sinfulness. How
are we to explain this paradox? The only explanation one could give is
that those people who are deeply suffering from pain and illness are offered
benefits. They have surely been and purified, so that in some way have
become worthy of divine mercy. But in the case of the sterile night at
sea there was no particular reason for Christ to feel sympathetic towards
St Peter and the other disciples who were with him. There were many people
who toiled for endless hours in those parts without catching anything!
Did Christ do any miracle for them all? Why, then, should he show particular
sympathy towards Peter? It appears that these 'Whys' had silently revolted
his conscience, and since he could not find any answer and excuse, he
felt even greater the need to confess his sinfulness towards the all-knowing
Lord: "depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord".
Who else from the Twelve Apostles ever dared to make such a confession?
Who else ever made such a comparison? Who else considered himself humbler
than the others, and unworthy even for such a "lucky'" catch
of fish?
This means that the "leader" of the Apostles was at the
same time the humblest and the most contrite of aft the other Disciples
of Christ. What could such a type of Peter have in common with the one
whom the West created in imagination as the "Prince of the Apostles"?
It is, then, this true Peter, the person of contrition and humility,
the one who in the end truly sacrificed his fife for Christ, precisely
as he had promised it to Him, that is worth looking again at the "head"
of the Apostles for all his gifts. And we should love him precisely as
he has taught us to do with his Catholic Epistles, namely, to love him
earnestly "(1 Peter 1:22).
from
Voice of Orthodoxy, vol 11/11, November 1990
the official publication of the Greek Orthodox Archbiocese of Australia
|