Lecture 3 — Christ’s injunction to Peter

^21:15^ When therefore they had dined, Jesus said to Simon Peter: Simon son of John, do you love me more than these? He said to him: yes, Lord, you know that I love you. He said to him: feed my lambs. [n. 2615]

^21:16^ He said to him again: Simon, son of John, do you love me? He said to him: yes, Lord, you know that I love you. He said to him: feed my lambs. [n. 2624]

^21:17^ He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, do you love me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: do you love me? And he said to him: Lord, you know all things, you know that I love you. He said to him: feed my sheep. [n. 2627]

2614. The Evangelist just showed what the Lord did for the disciples in general; here he shows him dealing with his two especially loved disciples:

first, what he did for Peter;

second how he dealt with John: Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved (John 21:20).

He does two things with the first:

first, he lays on Peter the pastoral office;

second, he predicts that he will be martyred: amen, amen I say to you, when you were younger (John 21:18).

He imposes the pastoral office on Peter only after an examination. Thus, those who are to be raised to this office are first examined, do not be hasty in the laying on of hands (1 Tim 5:22). Christ examined him three times, and so this part is divided into three parts according to the three examinations.

The parts are obvious. In the first part

we first see our Lord’s question:

second we see Peter’s answer, yes, Lord, you know that I love you;

and third, we see the imposition of the office: he said to him: feed my lambs.

Looking at the first, we can consider three things:

the time of the examination;

the tenor of the conversation;

and on what Peter was examined.

2615. The order of this event is given as when therefore, they had dined. This signifies the spiritual meal by which the soul is refreshed with spiritual gifts, even when it is united to the body: I will come in to him and eat with him (Rev 3:20). Therefore it is appropriate that one who is raised to this office be already refreshed with this joyous meal. Otherwise, how could he refresh the hungry ones that come to him: I will feast the soul of the priests with abundance (Jer 31:14), with that abundance mentioned in Psalm: my soul is feasted as with marrow and fat (Ps 63:5).

2616. The tenor of the conversation is seen when he says, Jesus said to Simon Peter. Three things are given here which are necessary for a prelate.

First, obedience, when he says, Simon, which means obedient. A prelate needs to be obedient because one who does not know how to obey superiors does not know how to govern inferiors: an obedient man will speak of victory (Prov 21:28).

Second, a prelate needs knowledge, indicated by Peter, which means understanding. A prelate needs understanding for he is the appointed watchman, and one who is blind is a poor watchman: his watchmen are blind (Isa 56:10); because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you from being a priest to me (Hos 4:6).

Third, a prelate needs grace, for he says son of John. Prelates need grace because if they do not have grace they do not have anything: by the grace of God I am what I am (1 Cor 15:10); and when they perceived the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship (Gal 2:9).

2617. The questions are about love; and Jesus asks, do you love me more than these? This was a suitable question, for Peter had previously fallen, as we saw before, and it was not appropriate that he be preferred to the others until his sin was forgiven, which is only brought about by charity: love covers a multitude of sins (1 Pet 4:8); love covers all offenses (Prov 10:12). So it was fitting that his charity be made known by this questioning, not indeed to him who looks into the depths of our hearts, but to others. So Christ said, but not as one who did not already know, do you love me more than these? Now we read that perfect love casts out fear (1 John 4:18). Thus it was that when our Lord was about to die, Peter was afraid and denied him; but the risen Lord restored love and banished his fear. So Peter, who before had denied Christ because he was afraid to die, now, after our Lord has arisen, feared nothing. Why should he be afraid, since he now realized that death had died?

2618. This questioning was also appropriate for the office, since many who assume a pastoral office use it as self-lovers: in the last days there will come times of stress. For men will be lovers of self (1 Tim 3:1). One who does not love the Lord is not a fit prelate. A fit prelate is one who does not seek his own advantage, but that of Christ; and he does this through love: the love of Christ impels us (2 Cor 5:14).

Love also becomes this office because it benefits others: for it is due to the abundance of love that those who love Jesus will at times give up the quiet of their own contemplation to help their neighbor. Although the Apostle said, I am sure that neither death nor life . . . will be able to separate us from the love of God (Rom 8:39), he added, for I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brethren (Rom 9:3). Thus a prelate should be questioned about his love.

2619. He adds, more than these, for even as the Philosopher says in his Politics, it is the natural order of things that the one who cares for and governs others should be better (1.12). Thus he says that just as the soul is to the body that it rules, and reason is to our lower powers, so man is related to the irrational animals. And there ought to be a similar relation between prelates and their subjects. Thus, according to Gregory, the life of a pastor should be such that he is related to his subjects as a shepherd to his sheep. (Forty Gospel Homilies 14.) So Christ says, more than these, because the more Peter loves the better he is: do you see him whom the Lord has chosen? There is none like him among all the people (1 Sam 10:24).

2620. But in selecting someone is it always necessary to choose the one who is unconditionally better, even if the laws say that it is enough to choose one who is merely good?

To answer this two distinctions must be made. Some things are sufficient according to human judgment which are still not sufficient according to the divine judgment. According to human judgment, if a person cannot be reproached for something, this is sufficient for his election to stand. For it is obvious that it would be difficult to have elections if they could be nullified because someone was found who was better than the one actually chosen. So, according to our human judgment, it is sufficient if an election is honest and a suitable person is chosen.

But, so far as concerns the divine judgment, and our own conscience, it is necessary to choose what is better. Now a person can be better simply; and this is the way a holier person is said to be better, for holiness makes one good. Yet such a person might not be better for the Church. For this purpose, that person would be better who is better educated, more competent, more discerning, and chosen more unanimously. But if other things are equal, such as the benefit and welfare of the Church, one would sin if he were to choose a person who was less unconditionally good than another. The reason for this is either the honor of God and the benefit of the Church, or some private motive. If the motive is the honor of God and the benefit to the Church, these goods will be regarded as linked to the one chosen, and will make him the better person, in these respects. If there is some private motive for the choice, such as carnal love, the expectation of ecclesiastical advancement, or temporal advantage, the election is a fraud and there has been partiality.

2621. Now we see Peter’s answer, yes, Lord, you know that I love you. This is a clear sign that he had retracted his previous denial. And it shows that if the predestined fall, they are always better after they are corrected. Before his denial, Peter thought that he was better than the other apostles, saying, though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away (Matt 26:33). And when Jesus said to him, you will deny me three times, Peter went against this and even boasted that even if I must die with you, I will not deny you (Matt 26:35). But now, Peter, having been conquered by his own weakness, does not presume to state his love unless it is attested to and confirmed by the Lord. He humbles himself before Christ, saying, you know that I love you: my witness is in heaven, and he that vouches for me is on high (Job 16:19). He also humbles himself in respect to the apostles, for he does not say that he loves Jesus more than they do, but simply, I love you. This teaches us not to rank ourselves before others, but others before ourselves: in humility count others better than yourselves (Phil 2:3).

2622. We can also notice, as Augustine points out, that when our Lord asks, do you love (diligis) me, Peter does not answer with the same word, but says I love (amo) you, as if they were the same. (Tractates on the Gospel of John 123.5.) And they are the same in reality, but there is some difference in meaning. Love (amor) is a movement of our appetitive power, and if this is regulated by our reason it is the will’s act of love, which is called direction (dilectio), because it presupposes an act of election, choice (electio). This is why the brute animals are not said to love (diligere). For if the appetitive movement is not regulated by reason, it is called amor.

2623. After this examination, Christ assigns Peter his office, saying, feed my lambs, that is, my faithful, which I, the Lamb, call lambs: behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). Thus, one should not be called a Christian who says he is not under the care of that shepherd, that is, Peter: they will all have one shepherd (Ezek 37:24); they will appoint for themselves one head (Hos 1:11).

It was appropriate that this office be assigned to Peter, the others being passed over, because, according to Chrysostom, he was the extraordinary apostle, the voice of the disciples, and the head of the group. (Commentary on Saint John 88.1.)

2624. Now is the second examination. In order to avoid repetition, note that Christ says three times, feed my lambs, because Peter ought to feed them three ways. First, they are to be fed by being taught: and I will give you shepherds after my own heart, who will feed you with knowledge and understanding (Jer 3:15). Second, they are to be fed by example: set the believers an example in speech and conduct, in love, in faith, in purity (1 Tim 4:12); upon the mountain heights of Israel, that is, in the excellence of great men, will be their pasture (Ezek 34:14). Third, they are to be fed by being offered temporal help: woe, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep? (Ezek 34:2).

2625. The third time Christ says to him, feed my sheep. This is because there are three types of people in the Church: beginners, those who have made some progress, and the perfect. The first two types are the lambs, since they are still imperfect. The others, since they are perfect, are called sheep: the mountains, that is, the perfect, skipped like rams, and the hills, the others, like lambs (Ps 114:4). And so all prelates ought to guard their charges as Christ’s sheep and not their own. But alas! As Augustine says in his Easter Sermon: we witness the appearance of certain unfaithful servants who have abandoned Christ’s flock and by their thefts have made gold their flock. You hear them say: these are my sheep. What do you want with my sheep? I will not let you come to my sheep. But if we say: my sheep, and others talk about their sheep, then Christ has lost his own sheep. (Sermons 147a.2.)

2626. Note also that just as Peter was assigned his office three times, so he was examined three times. This was because he had denied Christ three times. As Augustine says: a threefold profession was required so that Peter’s tongue might show as much love as it had shown of fear, and that life gained would wrest more words than the threat of death. (Tractates on the Gospel of John 123.5.)

Another reason for this was because Peter was obligated to love Christ for three things. First, because his sin was forgiven, many sins are forgiven her, because she has loved much (Luke 7:47). Second, because he was promised a great honor: on this rock I will build my Church (Matt 16:18). Third, because of the office entrusted to him, as here, when Christ says feed and entrusts the care of the Church to him. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, so that you will direct your entire intention to God, and with all your soul, so that your entire will might rest in God through love, and with all your might (Deut 6:5), so that the performance of all your actions will serve God.

2627. Peter, because asked three times, became sad. As was seen, he was rebuked by our Lord before the passion when he so quickly asserted that he loved him. Now, seeing that he is questioned so many times about his love, he is afraid he will be rebuked again and becomes sad. Thus he says, Lord, you know all things, you know that I love you. He is saying in effect: I do love you; at least I think I do. But you know all things, and perhaps you know of something else that will happen. And so the final commitment of the Church is given to the humbled Peter. According to one of the Greek doctors, this is also the reason why catechumens are questioned three times during their baptism. (Theophylact of Ochrid, The Explanation of the Holy Gospel According to John 21.15–19.)