Do you love me more than these?

Understanding Jesus' intriguing question to Peter. What did John had to say about Peter?

This literary text is part of what is called to be the epilogue of the Gospel of John. Let us first lay the foundation of the chapter it belongs to. Important notes as to the setting, the literary context and the genre of the whole chapter 21 are essential in the understanding of the text under study. The so called Epilogue of the Gospel of John is an allusion to its lengthy and highly theological Prologue, written excellently to give a concise but substantial glimpse to the whole Gospel. The Epilogue in chapter 21, equally excellently written as it is, is not a theological discourse in nature but a narration of an event which ended in the eventual introduction of the Beloved Disciple as the one who is μαρτυπων, as the writer of the Gospel.

Several Biblical scholars have claimed that John 21:1-25 was a plausibly intended addition by redactors , and that the original Gospel ended at 20:31. The conceivable addition portrays an attempt to connect the supposed end of the Gospel in chapter 20 to the succeeding resurrection appearances in chapter 21 which seemingly belonging to Galilean tradition like that of Luke’s resurrection appearances. John and Luke presents several other places along the event of the resurrection appearances. For instance, Luke talks about Emmaus which is seven miles away from Jerusalem in Luke 24:13-35. John in the additional text of chapter 21, talks about Sea of Tiberias. Other Gospels, which only had one narrative of resurrection appearance dwelt only in Jerusalem and ended their respective accounts on the commissioning of the disciples right away.

Since biblical scholars agree that 21:1-25 is a full literary text that has been included to the Gospel, I would like to focus on John 21:15-19 as a full literary text. It expresses a complete literary context and complete thought and it qualifies both the preceding text 21:1-14 and the succeeding 21:20-25 as far as literary consistency is concerned. It has context, characters, literary genre, and dialogue. To this regard, it can have its own independent structure and not to mention its context and the active interchange between the two characters.

II. TEXT AND CONTEXT

The Structure of the Narrative of Peter’s Profession of Love is:

15a: Setting of the dialogue and

15b: First Question: Agapas me to Philo se. (Feed my lambs)

16: Second Question: Agapas me to Philo se (Tend my sheep)

17: Third Question: Phileis me to philo se. (Feed my sheep)

18 to 19a: Reminiscence of Peter’s Childhood and eventual fate.

19b: Jesus’ Invitation to Peter to follow him.

A. Immediate Context

The immediate context of this literary unit is that of the resurrection. It is the last of John’s account of the resurrection appearances where Jesus appeared to the trembling and doubting disciples. We can see in the preceding chapter that Jesus firstly appeared to Mary Magdalene who did not recognise him right away. Secondly, he appeared to the disciples behind doors and manifested his wounds and his glory to Thomas. This is rightly so, that in 21:14 it has been articulated assuringly that Jesus’ appearance to the disciples at the sea of Tiberias was the third time it has happened.

Since we are focusing on 21:15-19 which is sandwiched by 21:1-14 which is the narrative of the appearance of the risen Lord to his disciples at the Sea of Tiberias and by 21:20-23 which about the Beloved Disciple and Peter, and 21:24-25 which is the second Epilogue, I would like point out the importance of these pericopes both in building up to the moment of Peter and Jesus and in their role in magnifying of the significance of taking 21:15-19 independently. Just as Thomas’ had his chance to have a special moment with the Lord, so did Peter. But apart from it all, “Peter has the most important role in the fishing narrative.” In fact, more so with Peter because of the precedence of his threefold denial which scholars associate with the threefold question or restoration of Peter.

The Beloved Disciple in 21:20-25 is an imposing presence. Peter might have felt the same way hence his question in 21:21. While the focus is shifting from Peter who is now restored, to the Beloved Disciple, it is becoming evident that the Beloved Disciple has a special privilege around the Lord, indeed a Beloved Disciple. However, ambiguities on the side of Peter and the Beloved Disciple are wiped when there was an important image which Jesus, Peter and Beloved Disciple fall into, -that is in 21:20. Maloney identifies the relationship of the two in a very dramatic way. “Peter has firmly been established as a disciple, as a pastor, but questions remain around the figure of the Beloved Disciple. The Paths of these two characters have entwined across the later part of the Gospel, at the Last Meal (13:23-25), in the court of the high priest (18:15-16), and at the empty tomb 20:3-10).”

The prime issue that 21:20-23 is seemingly engendering is the obvious importance of Peter among the disciples against the Beloved Disciple’s so-called playing of different card with Jesus. This, and not to mention that the Beloved Disciple was mistakenly said to be invulnerable to death. In 21:23, the writer himself clarifies that Jesus was talking about μένω or παραμένει and not ανηθικότητα or immortality. However, 21:20 offers an image which gives settlement; the Beloved Disciple is a follower, and Peter is the Primus inter pares. This presentation of Peter’s primacy not over the beloved disciple but primacy among the disciples is part and completes the Johannine testimony.

B. Proximate Context

The proximate context would be Peter’s threefold denial. Although some scholars identify the threefold question to be a kind of restoration of Peter, some notable scholars also don’t agree to it. Nevertheless, I would like to take on this notion as remotely related to the context of the threefold question. The Good Shepherd image also falls into the remote context because of the reference of Sheep and Lamb. This image was earlier used in 10:11 whereby Jesus presents himself as the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for the sheep. We take this scene and statement of Jesus now and give it to Peter, not replacing Jesus but Shepherding in the name of Jesus.

C. Remote Context

Peter’s Christological declaration in Matthew 16:16 is to be counted as remote context of the Johannine profession of love. Intertextually, Matthew 16: 18 which is the commissioning of the Petrine ministry; and I tell you Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hades will not prevail against it, John 21:15-19 is an invitation for discipleship as indicated in Jesus’s words ακολουθει μοι.We can have glimpse of the Petrine Ministry in the succeeding texts where Peter asks what about him? referring to the Beloved Disciple’s seeming special place. True enough, the Book of the Acts of the Apostles identifies Peter as the leader of the early Christian church.

Peter’s expression of his desire to follow the Lord and to die for him in 13:37 is counted as remote context but essential to the understanding of threefold denial which in turn is considered here as a proximate context. In 13:36-38, Peter’s denial was foretold. In v38 we see the blatant words of Jesus foretelling the upcoming denial: Very truly I tell you, before the cock crows, you will have denied me three times. On the other hand, Peter was assured that he will follow later (13:36). Peter’s death is a fulfilment of the prophesy of his death in other written literary accounts.

III. ANALYSIS OF KEYWORDS, PHRASES, CONCEPT

Αγαπε means "love: esp. charity; it is used by Christians to express the unconditional love of God for his children. Φιλία means "affectionate regard, friendship", usually "between equals. When Jesus was evoking αγαπε from Peter, he was evoking a rational form of love, one that is mutually shared in the light of divine love. Φιλία which was Peter’s response all throughout was a display of Peter’s weaknesses of which the Risen Lord accepts and settles for. Some scholars call Jesus’ settlement to Φιλία is not a settlement for less but an act of acceptance of what Peter had to offer.

Verse 15 narrates the first of the thrice-repeated question of Jesus to Peter. However, the first question shows a very different form. It comes with Ιωαννου, αγαπαζ με πλεον τουτων (Do you love me more than these?) Harrington suggests that τουτων refers to the comparison on Peter’s love for Jesus and the disciples. It is often presumed that it referred to the fishing trade and tools and the very joy having caught many fishes, a hundred fifty-three at that. However, βοσκε τα απρια μον qualifies that Jesus was speaking about more than just tools, trade and the success of fishing since feeding the απρια or προβατα refers to nourishing humans in this pericope and in 10:10. Peter answers υαι κυριε, συ οιδας οτι πιλω σε.

In verse 16, the writer uses other words both for the subject (sheep) and the form of nourishment (tend). John uses ποιμαινε τα προβατα μου and the answer of Peter remains υαι κυριε, συ οιδας οτι πιλω σε.

In verse 17, the writer presents Peter’s feeling: ελυφήθή ό Πετρος οτι ειπεν αυτω το τριτον φιλεις με. Some scholars claim that the threefold question humbled Peter who previously declared that he would die for Jesus in 13:36 at the Last Supper event. “When Jesus asks Peter if he loves him more than these, he reminds Peter about his solitary boasts to be willing to lay down his life for Jesus, and Jesus’ prophecy of Peter’s threefold denial.” On this third question, Jesus settles to φιλεις με to which Peter answers the same πιλω σε.

The inter play of αγαπε and πιλω in the dialogue of Jesus and Peter in chapters 15-17 is one that is worth delving into. We can see it as a double meaning only in its Greek form because there is a discrepancy between αγαπε and πιλω, but not in English love. Both αγαπε and φιλία  are applicable to the thought they engender but the αγαπε question invites a deeper and rational form of love while πιλω is of lesser gravity.

Consequently, since we delve into the double meaning of the αγαπε and πιλω, love in this sense is a recurring word. Each of αγαπε and πιλω, though seemingly interchangeably, were mentioned 3 times each not counting that of v17 where it was repeated as a reference an earlier statement. The words απρια and προβατα pointing to one kind of animal which was earlier used for another image in 10:11, recurred along with love. The command of the form of nourishing the απρια and προβατα varied also from ποιμαινε to βοσκε.

In chapters 18-19, we can see Jesus’ reference to Peter’s Childhood prophecies Jesus had with the kind of death Peter was about to endure. Maloney favours the interpretation that it is inspired by a Proverb: possibly from the Book of Proverbs 20:29 The glory of youths is their strength, but the beauty of the aged is their grey hair. Maloney also points to Peter’s youthful links to Jesus before his death and resurrection and his fading to death by his glorification of God through his death through martyrdom.

By youthful links I am referring to the impetus, reactive, hasty disciples who committed mistakes because of his irrational reactions. Things would become so seriously dreadful after his commissioning to lead the early members of Christianity because it would lead to his eventual εκτευειζ ταζ ξεραζ σου, και αλλος σε ζωσει και οισει οπου ου θελειζ. (v18b) The first part of verse 19 affirms τουτο δε ειπεν σημαιων ποιω θανατω δοζασει τον θεον. The end of the Pericope is an invitation for discipleship ακολουθει μοι.

IV. MEANING OF THE TEXT THEN AND NOW

The underlying message of this pericope is Peter’s profession of love to to the Risen Lord. This profession of love is to be seen as a sheer expression of the relationship which Peter and Jesus had before the passion and death, -after the threefold denial. This is mentioned in the immediate context of 21:15-19. The resurrected Lord evokes emotions of joy, hope and amazement among his followers, Peter no less.

After Jesus asked Peter Ιωαννου, αγαπαζ με πλεον τουτων? the answers of Peter were in the line of φιλια and not of αγαπε because he was coming from the context where he saw Jesus Crucified who is now risen. In a way, Peter too was confused and partly doubting before the majestic presence of Jesus. This is manifested in his φιλια response. Jesus’ settlement to Φιλία is not a settlement for less but an act of acceptance of what Peter had to offer. After all, Peter had been restored from being grounded in fear in his denial to being grounded in love in his profession.

Today, this scene have been said to be alluding to Peter’s threefold denial, sort of a privileged event which restored Peter back into the fold. Some scholars even spoke about it as Jesus’ settlement to φιλια which is all what Peter had to offer into the relationship.

The Risen Lord commissions Peter to be his vicar-shepherd by first inviting him towards discipleship in v19. It is today linked to the Petrine Ministry, a sort of justification for Peter’s important role to the early Church and even today. It clearly supports Matthew 16:18 in this sense. The meal in v19 is a form of entry, a sort of meal-ticket towards displaying his majesty once more on the ocean. In the calling of Peter in 4:18-24, και λεγει αυτοις δευτε οπισω μου, Peter was in the context of fishing.

Modern biblical scholars identify the breakfast in v15 which goes back all the way to chapter 20, as Eucharistic overtures. The images of fish and communion are consistent with the eucharistic themes. Modern theologians claim that the meal with the risen Lord sustains the disciples’ journey of faith and their mission continues. It offers an image of the importance of communion, the breaking of the bread before the sending of the disciples for mission.

V. CONCLUSION

Peter is an image of a weak disciple. This is what the fourth gospel wishes to portray for a reason. His denial of Jesus, which perhaps can be considered a major blunder he had, was emphasised in most blatant of ways. The denial was foretold in 13:36-38, and was restored or alluded in 21:15-17. The seemingly-intimidating presence of the Beloved Disciple in 21:20-23 is a blatant manifestation of what an ideal disciple could have been at the time of resurrection in contrast with Peter’s denial. Not to mention the many times Jesus had to cut Peter down when he reacted appropriately to several statements and circumstances; Peter’s failure to understand the will of the Father in 18:10-11,26.

In this chapter 21, we can see that Peter is seen always behind the shadow of the Beloved Disciple. But nothing in this chapter mentions anything against Peter’s primacy. Instead, he was restored and was invited for discipleship. Petrine ministry is not so much of John’s concern unlike in Matthew where symbols of key and church were mentioned most publicly. Petrine ministry in John is fundamentally about discipleship and the mission to continue his [Jesus’] founded church.

This pericope I studied is one that is very much connected with other important life events in the life of Jesus in the Johannine account. This 5 verses contributes to the ecclesial integrity of the Church and most importantly it gives us a glimpse of the image of resurrection. Resurrection is a majestic and dumbfounding reality the when one experiences it, it leads us to awe and wonder. All the things Jesus did in his resurrection appearances give us clue on what resurrection looks like, its atmosphere, its attitude, its relational capacity, its knowability and its language which Jesus all showed the whole time, and particularly in our case, in the solemn encounter between Jesus and Peter.

---

ON A PERSONAL NOTE:

I choose this pericope because of my unforgettable experience of it. One Sunday morning, I woke up to open the Chapel at the Seminary and ring the bless for Angelus. As I was on my way, there was a clear view inside my mind. Peter was asked by Jesus. The voices were so clear. I was not disposed to it but it came. I am not holding a bible, did not open it as I just woke up and was heading to the chapel. I was still a bit sleepy I might say. However, the part of the Gospel where Jesus asked Peter the third time and Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time was so clear and was so powerful that it lead me to tears and lead me to kneel right away when I arrived at the chapel. To this day, I look back to that feeling I had that moment and gratitude fills my heart every-time.

---

SOURCES:

Brown, Raymond, Karl Donfried & John Reumann. Editors. Peter in the New Testament. Minneapolis: Ausburg Publishing House, 1973.

Brown, Raymond. The Gospel and Epistles of John: A Concise Commentary. Minnesota: The Liturgical Press.

Crosby, Michael. “Do You Love Me?” Jesus Questions the Church. New York: Obrbis

Books, 2000.

Martin, Francis and William Wright IV. The Gospel of John. Michigan: Baker Academic, 2015.

Moloney, Francis J. The Gospel of John, vol. 2, Sacra Pagina Series. Editor. Daniel

Harrington. Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1998.

Perkins, Pheme. Peter: Apostle for the Whole Church. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000.

Vawter, Bruce. The Gospel According to John, vol. 2, The Jerome Commentary. New

Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc., 1968.