of the Cliurcli, by liis thrice repeated denial of his Master. Our Lord in mercy guards against this possibility, by publicly commissioning Peter once more to do the work of a pastor in the Church.
(c) I believe our Lord's third object was to teach Peter what should be the primary aim of an Apostle and minister. The true qualification for the ministerial office, he must learn, was not high profession of more courage and zeal than others, not loud talk, or even readiness to fight ; but loving, patient usefulness to the souls of others, and diligent care for the sheep of Christ's flock.
Calvin remarks, " The Evangelist now relates in what manner Peter was restored to that rank of honor from which he had fallen. The treacherous denial, which has been formerly de- scribed, had undoubtedly rendered him unworthy of the apos- tleship ; for how could he be capable of instructing others in the faith, who had basely revolted from it ? He had been made an Apostle, but it was along with Judas ; and from the time that he acted the part of a coward and traitor, he had been de- prived of the honor of apostleship. Now therefore the liberty, as well as the authority of teaching is restored to him, both of which he had lost through his own fault. And that the dis- grace of his apostacy might not stand in the way, Christ blots out and destroys the remembrance of it. Such a restoration was necessary, both for Peter and his hearers : for Peter, that he might the more boldly execute his office, being assured of the calling with which Christ had again invested him ; for his hearers, that the stain which attached to his person might not be the occasion of despising the Gospel, To us also, in the present day, it is of very great importance that Peter comes forth to us as a new man, from whom the disgrace that might have lessened his authority, is removed."
The Roman Catholic theory, that our Lord specially addressed Peter, on this occasion, in order to mark him out as head of the Church, is one which I repudiate as preposterous, unreasonable, improbable, and utterly destitute of solid foundation. Neither here, nor elsewhere, is there a tittle of evidence to show that any primacy was ever intended to be given to Peter. On the contrary, the fact that our Lord specially appeared on one oc casion to James alone, and that afterwards James was the pre- siding Apostle in the first Council at Jerusalem, would seem to indicate that, if He conferred primacy on any Apostle, He con- ferred it on James. But there is no proof that primacy was conferred on any one at all.
Burgon says. " The profane and ridiculous pretentions of the Church of Rome are based in great part on the words of our Saviour addressed to St. Peter in this passage. The Papists assume (1) that He hereby appointed St. Peter to be His vicar upon earth ; (2) that St. Peter was the first Bishop of Rome ;