Monday, September 11, 2023

Vincent Twomey on Eusebius Interpretation of Matthew 16:18 in Theophany 4,11

  

Theophany 4,11 (c. AD 333):


11. When asking His Disciples on a certain occasion, what men said of Him, and they answering according to the opinion of the many, He asked them the second time, "But what say ye?" and, when Simon had said unto Him, "Thou art the Christ of the living God" He answered him, and said : "Blessed art thou Simon son of Jonas, since flesh and blood hath not revealed (this) to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I also say to thee, Thou art Cephas: and upon this rock do I build my Church, and the gate-bars of Hell shall not prevail against it." The (term) "this" He took (as implying) the knowledge, that He was the Messiah, the Son of the living God ; and Cephas (the rock), because it should neither be rent nor moved. It is not unlikely, that He named (in) " THIS"  the whole sense comprised here. On this account too, He designated that same Disciple, who had formerly been called Simon, Cephas (Peter), with reference to this knowledge; (and) of which He afterwards prophesied, and said: "On this rock do I build my Church, and the gate-bars of Hell shall not prevail against it." He foretold at once something to come to pass, and promised, that Himself would build it (the Church), and bring the work to completion, by the things of this knowledge which had now been  given concerning Himself; that it should be made firm as on a confirmed foundation ; and that His Church should be built, solely by means of His own power which is everlasting, and that the gates of Hell should never overcome it. He himself afforded a proof (of this) in the fulfilment, better than any (that) words (can give). For innumerable persecutions, and many forms of death, have sprung up against His Church, but in nothing could they prevail against it. He has therefore, openly confirmed the enouncement of His prediction, by deeds; its truth He has shewn, by the fulfilment. The Church too, which He called the congregation, about to be set up in His name, evinced no small foreknowledge: for the congregations of the Jews had been termed Synagogues; and, during the time of His going about among men, He frequented the Synagogue of the Jews. Nor was there hitherto, so much as one Synagogue only, set apart to Him. And, Who is not astonished, that He so foreknew those congregations which should afterwards be set up, at a great distance of time, in His name, and, that He should not name them, after the Jewish custom, Synagogues, but Churches ? He added too, that the gate-bars of Hell should not prevail against them:-- things, which we perceive with our own eyes ! Nor should we wonder at the prediction only, but also at His promise, namely, "I build my Church upon the rock, and the gate-bars of Hell shall not prevail against it:" which is (all) so brought near in fact, that we can see it ! For it was not by the power of men, nor yet by the superiority of the Teachers (employed), that His Church was raised ; but, it was He who promised, and in deed fulfilled His promise ! --He (I say) who up to this time has, by the Divine Power, built up, and enlarged, His Church throughout the whole creation of man ! 

 

This text records the one occasion when Eusebius explicitly engages in an exegesis of the Matthean text, rather than either alluding to it or drawing on it to help explain either historical events or other scriptural texts. . . . The very awkwardness of the argumentation reveals how Eusebius is here forcing an interpretation on the text of Mt 16,17-18 which does not fit. He has rejected the earlier literal interpretation of Origen which simply stated that the Church of Christ was bult “on Peter”—which interpretation formed the backbone of his original History. As his treatment of Mt 16,18 in the Praeparatio and the Commentary on Ps 17 showed, there is but one Rock or foundation on which the Church is built: Christ, or rather, the Power of God. . . . It is the power of God which is the foundation on which the Church is built. But Eusebius had to find a way of reconciling this truth with the statement of Mt 16,18. His difficulty is shown in the way he affirms in the one line how Christ named the knowledge of Peter: πετρος, while the next line he says that He gave the name of Peter to Simon, adding that this was because of his knowledge. What is clear is that the prophecy of our Lord, according to Eusebius, does not refer to the person or mission of Peter as such: this is the point of the whole passage. Eusebius’ original ecclesiology disappeared in the night of the persecutions and in its place stands the Church of the ‘new dispensation’ in which the prophecies of Christ have been fulfilled through the manifestation of His power in overcoming His enemies (the persecutors) and securing the establishment of Hus Church as the one recognized religion of the οικουμενη. (Vincent Twomey, Apostolikos Thronos: The Primacy of Rome as Reflected in the Church History of Eusebius and the Historico-Apologetic Writings of Saint Athanasius the Great [Münster: Aschendorff, 1982], 225, 226-27)

 

Blog Archive