The Ring of the Fisherman

Today, (February 28, 2013) is a significant day for Roman Catholics worldwide as the current Pope steps aside, the first time a Pope has done so in almost 600 years. A number of symbolic ceremonies will mark the occasion including the breaking of the Papal ring, called the Ring of the Fisherman, also known as the Piscatory Ring, Annulus Piscatoris (in Latin) and the Anello Piscatorio (in Italian). This is an official part of the regalia worn by the Pope, head of the Roman Catholic Church. As I am sure we are all aware, Rome claims that the Pope is the successor of the Apostle Peter, who by trade was a fisherman. The design of the ring features a bas-relief of Peter fishing from a boat. The Fisherman’s Ring was used until 1842 to seal official documents signed by the Pope.

Wikipedia says, “A new ring is cast in gold for each Pope. Around the relief image is the reigning Pope’s Latin name in raised lettering. During the ceremony of a Papal coronation or Papal inauguration, the Dean of the College of Cardinals slips the ring on the third finger of the new Pope’s right hand. Upon a papal death, the ring is ceremonially broken in the presence of other Cardinals by the Camerlengo, in order to prevent the sealing of backdated, forged documents during the interregnum, or sede vacante. This custom is also planned to be followed after the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI.”

With today’s events in mind, what follows is a question and answer repost of a blog article here regarding the question of Peter and the keys:

Question: The Roman Catholic Church claims that the Apostle Peter was the first Pope. Much is made of Jesus giving Peter the keys of the kingdom. Do you have anything that would help me rightly understand this Matthew 16 passage?

Thank you for your question. It is a very important one. You are right to say that Roman Catholics make much of this passage claiming that it teaches Rome’s position on the Papacy in clear terms. In my opinion, the best treatment of the passage in question is found in Dr. James White’s book “The Roman Catholic Controversy.” The entire book is immensely helpful, and while written back in 1996, is just as relevant to the situation in our day. Roman Catholics, for all their claims, actually do not have history on their side in this debate. This article addresses this in summary form. However, regarding the Matthew 16 passage, rather than summarizing Dr. White’s words, let me quote directly from the book, from Chapter 8 “The Claims of the Papacy”, pages 115-118:

Few would argue that the foundational passage on which the entire Roman Catholic claim for the Papacy rests is found in Matthew 16:13-20, verses 18-19 in particular. We are told that their plain meaning supports the concept. It should be noted that Rome has infallibly interpreted these verses in the words of Vatican I. It is one of the few passages of Scripture that have in fact been infallibly interpreted by the Roman Catholic Church (John 21:25-27 being another). Let’s look at Matthew’s record.

He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

No one will deny that this is a singularly important passage. Here the Lord Jesus leads His disciples to a confession of faith in himself; the Father from heaven reveals the true nature of His Son, Jesus Christ.

Yet we find these verses being used to support a concept seen nowhere else in Scripture. We are asked to believe that not only is the impetuous and frail Peter made the very foundation of the Church itself, but that this foundational position creates an office of Pope, and that this office involves successors who will sit in the seat of bishop in the city of Rome, 1,500 miles distant.
Continue reading

Reviews of Twelve What Abouts

An author writes in hope of being read and that his readership would be helped by the things he has written. I just took a look at the reviews of my book on amazon.com John Samson, is the pastor of King’s Church in Phoenix, Arizona.

The book was published in February 2012 by Solid Ground Publishers. It has endorsements by John Hendryx (monergism.com) and James White (aomin.org). Both men are well known in reformed Christian circles.

The first three chapters of the book explain the theological position of election. Then, the following chapters attempt to answer common objections to election. Topics covered include: God’s love, sovereignty, foreknowledge and explanations of common “gotcha” scriptures that attempt to refute the reformed doctrine of election (John 3:16; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 Tim. 2:4; Matt. 23:37; 1 Tim. 4:10 and John 12:32). Also included are chapters on reprobation, lost loved ones, prayer, evangelism, faith, doubt, spiritual blindness and church mission.

Book Evaluation

Overall, I really enjoyed this book. John Samson’s writing style is eminently readable. He writes with knowledge, passion and compassion. He understands the difficulty that election can pose for some and he is sensitive to the reader. John explains concepts well, and presents a strong case for the reformed position on election.

The book is brief, which is a plus. Readers will not find exhaustive treatment of all the relevant scriptures in this book. It’s brevity is a strength, but also a weakness. There is not much in the way of footnotes, however there are ample quotations of scripture to back up his points. Readers are given an extensive “for further reading” list to explore topics further.

Again, this book is introductory. It seems that the target audience is Christians who may be investigating the reformed doctrine of election. I believe, along with the author, that it is the biblical position. John exegetes the scripture both thoroughly, concisely and accurately.

At 165 pages, the book is a fairly quick read. Fast readers should be able to complete the book in 2-3 hours. The book flows well, and for a non-fiction title, in my opinion it is a page turner. I have found this to be somewhat unusual for books of this type.

Book Recommendation

I would recommend this book to all Christians. Those who will gain the most benefit are those Christians who may be new to a reformed understanding of election, and want to dig a little deeper. I would recommend approaching this book with an open mind. The author repeatedly warns about our traditions and how they can sometimes blind us to different perspectives. We need to maintain an openness so we can at least understand the perspective presented here.