[OLD REGGIE]

Possible, but there's no evidence of that in Scripture. But since you bring up the end of John, where Christ says to Peter "feed my lambs, tend my sheep", it's interesting there that Christ is delegating his "Good Shepherdness" to Peter. Not that Peter becomes the Good Shepherd *in place* of Christ--that would be abject heresy and nonsense. But Christ makes Peter a guardian and shepherd of His flock in his stead.

Which reflects exactly what we are talking about in Matt 16.

I actually agree with the Catechism Of The Catholic Church tht the "Rock" associated with Peter was his confession of faith, not Peter the man.

To save the time of pouring through my prior posts I will repeat the pertinent paragraph:

424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.

Frankly, I don't actually believe Jesus took the "Rockyness" away from Peter. He may simply have put Peter through the ringer exactly three times because Peter had denied Him three times. Who knows?

"But Christ makes Peter a guardian and shepherd of His flock in his stead...".

There is no Scriptural evidence that Peter was given any special authority over the other Apostles. He was first chosen but equal. Nothing more.

Luke 22:
[24] A dispute also arose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest.
[25] And he said to them, "The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors.
[26] But not so with you; rather let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves.
[27] For which is the 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 one who serves.
[28] "You are those who have continued with me in my trials;
[29] and I assign to you, as my Father assigned to me, a kingdom,
[30] that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.


BTW do you wish to comment on whether Jesus had named Simon as Peter prior to his "confession of faith"?

[Claud]

I actually agree with the Catechism Of The Catholic Church tht the "Rock" associated with Peter was his confession of faith, not Peter the man.

As I've said repeatedly, that is an old old interpretation that goes back to the Church Fathers and is none the worse for wear. I agree with it too! But not *to the exclusion* of Peter being the Rock as well. It's both Peter and Peter's confession.

BTW do you wish to comment on whether Jesus had named Simon as Peter prior to his "confession of faith"?

Sure, I think your point is a quite valid one. The name could well have preceded the confession. But that opens up another can of worms for your position, I think. Namely, if the name "Peter" was given to Simon *before* his confession, then how could it be that the name refers *only* to Peter's confession, which hadn't even happened when the name was given?

There is no Scriptural evidence that Peter was given any special authority over the other Apostles. He was first chosen but equal. Nothing more.

Well, there we have a problem. I've been doing little else but citing that Scriptural evidence. :)