The Boston College Papacy Debate

How it ran

1. 0:01Butler opening statement (Scripture)
2. 29:33Zins opening statement
3. 59:07Sungenis opening statement
4. 1:19:45White's statement on Scripture
5. 1:39:47Sungenis rebuttal
6. 1:49:43Zins rebuttal
7. 2:00:12White's opening statement on history
8. 2:29:34Butler statement on history
9. 2:59:34Zins statement on history
10. 3:15:13Sungenis rebuttal on history
11. 3:30:12White's rebuttal
12. 3:40:21Butler rebuttal
13. 3:50:30Sungenis closing statement
14. 4:00:27Zins closing statement

The key exchanges

James White and Robert Zins's point first, then Robert's answer. The time jumps to that moment in the video.

1. 1:00:31

   1. Paul rebukes Peter

   Zins argues that in Galatians 2 Paul opposed Peter to his face because he stood condemned for hypocrisy and was not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, which is not the record of a pope.

   Robert answered that Paul's concern in Acts 15 and Galatians was Judaizers circumcising Gentiles, and Peter circumcised no one; he only withdrew from table fellowship. He added that Paul himself circumcised Timothy, and that Augustine called Peter's act a moment of imprudence, not a destruction of the gospel.

   “Paul accuses Peter of disfellowshipping with the Gentiles, a very minor infraction.”

2. 1:04:58

   2. Who led the council

   Zins argues that Acts 15 shows the apostles and elders deciding together, with no sign that Peter governed the council, and that James had the final word and closed the session.

   Robert answered that of course all the apostles and elders were present at a council, but Peter was the one who stood first and declared that Gentiles need not be circumcised, citing the revelation God gave him in Acts 10. Paul, Barnabas and James then confirmed what Peter had said.

   “He's speaking in God's place at the council.”

3. 1:09:07

   3. Paul as the better pope

   Zins argues that if anyone looks like a pope in the New Testament it is Paul, who was set apart by the Spirit, carried the care of all the churches, wrote six times as much as Peter and claimed his words were the Lord's commandment.

   Robert answered that Paul himself went to Peter for fifteen days to learn from him, which he would not do if Peter had no prominence. Paul had his mission to the Gentiles and Peter his to the Jews, and how often a man is mentioned says nothing about who leads.

   “Frequency is not a criterion for leadership.”

4. 1:12:26

   4. Upon this rock

   Zins argues that the demonstrative in upon this rock, rather than upon you, turns attention away from Peter to his confession or to Christ.

   Robert answered that the Greek tauti te petra can be rendered this very rock or this same rock, as Protestant versions translate the same phrase elsewhere, so it points back to the rock just named. He added, against an argument in a White video, that rock is a noun and nouns have no grammatical person, so second and third person cannot be set against each other.

   “It's pointing out exactly the rock that I just talked about two words ago.”

5. 1:40:59

   5. No Aramaic Matthew

   White argues that no Aramaic Matthew exists, that Rome canonized a Greek Gospel, and that a dogma enforced by anathema cannot rest on a lost original whose wording is unknown.

   Robert answered that his case never relied on the Aramaic but on the Greek: Petros means rock, Jesus renamed Simon Kephas in John 1:42, and in Matthew 16 Peter alone received the revelation while the others had only the crowd's mistaken opinions.

   “I don't even use the Aramaic in my arguments.”

6. 1:43:19

   6. Rock without succession

   White argues that Protestant scholars such as Hendriksen and Alford who identify Peter as the rock all reject any papal succession drawn from the passage.

   Robert answered that he welcomed their agreement that Peter is the rock, and that he had never claimed Matthew 16 itself teaches succession, only that Peter is the rock and holds the keys. The refusal of succession is a Protestant problem, not a reading of the text.

   “I hope it doesn't take him another 400 years to discover the next truth, that there is succession.”

7. 1:45:32

   7. Strengthen your brothers

   White argues that the verb for strengthen in Luke 22:32 is used of Paul confirming churches, and that no lexical source says the one who confirms must hold higher authority.

   Robert answered that the meaning comes from the context: Jesus tells Peter to strengthen the apostles, the highest authority in the Church, and gives this charge to Peter, not to James or John.

   “Now, if Peter is to strengthen them who have authority, how can he do it without greater authority?”

8. 3:20:57

   8. Counting the fathers

   White argues, from Launoy's survey, that only about one in five patristic citations identifies Peter as the rock, while most take it as Peter's confession of faith or as Christ.

   Robert answered that Launoy was a Gallican opposed to Peter's primacy who counted medieval writers up to the twelfth century, and that the fathers did not separate Peter's faith from Peter, so most of the confession readings also point to Peter. He cited Theodore the Studite and John Damascene, and challenged his opponents to name even one father before 400 who said Christ is the rock.

   “And the most important point is in the early fathers, there was no difference in their mind between the faith of Peter and Peter himself.”

9. 3:25:50

   9. Ignatius and Rome

   Zins argues that Ignatius gave Rome only a presidency of love within its region and told Rome that Antioch now had God as its shepherd and Jesus Christ alone as its bishop.

   Robert answered that Zins cut the sentence short: Ignatius wrote that Jesus Christ alone and your love will bishop it, using the verb form of episkopos, so the Roman church alone among his addressees was expected to oversee Antioch. He added that the word Ignatius uses for Rome's presiding denotes authoritative position wherever else he uses it.

   “And he stopped there as if God is now the shepherd.”