Roman
Catholics look to “typology” to show how Mary is somehow present in the Old Testament, and thus more important
than she actually is in the New Testament. At
Called to Communion, the folks there noted that “Mary is present in the Old
Testament in three ways: in prophecy concerning the mother of the Redeemer, in
Old Testament figures of Mary, and in the ultimate mission of Israel…”
Regarding
Mary “typologically in Old Testament females, Bryan Cross explains:
Mary is present typologically in
various female figures in the Old Testament … Christ, the Church, the sacraments, and Mary
are all prefigured in the Old Testament, in much the way a human author
foreshadows future events in a novel. Mary is foreshadowed in the person of
Eve, in that both are mothers of all the living, yet in different ways. Eve is
the mother of all those living with natural life, while Mary is the mother of
all those living with supernatural life, though in other ways they are
opposites, for Mary’s obedience undoes the knot of Eve’s disobedience.
And
regarding Mary typologically in the “ultimate mission of Israel”, he explains:
the liturgy of the Church recognizes
the Old Testament references to the “Daughter of Zion” (and “Daughter of
Jerusalem”) as references to Mary, because she sums up in herself the mission
of the Jewish people. All Israel is the betrothed bride, but Mary is that bride
most perfectly and without blemish; she is the model of Israel as bride, as
daughter of Zion.
That’s
interesting methodology, but how does it work when applied to Peter? Peter,
too, is “foreshadowed” in the Old Testament, in the person of Reuben, and Reuben is a very close “figure”,
with closer identification with Peter than than Eve with Mary.
After all,
Peter has a number of characteristics that are far more common with Reuben than
Mary, either with Eve, or with “the ultimate mission Israel”.
Here’s what the CCC says about Peter:
Simon Peter holds the first place in the college of the Twelve; Jesus entrusted a
unique mission to him. Through a revelation from the Father, Peter had
confessed: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Our Lord
then declared to him: "You
are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will
not prevail against it." Christ, the "living Stone", thus
assures his Church, built on Peter, of victory over the powers of death.
Because of the faith he confessed Peter will remain the unshakable rock of the
Church. His mission will be to keep this faith from every lapse and to strengthen
his brothers in it.
But this is
clearly wrong. Paul (Ephesians 4, that great treatise on ecclesiology) and
John, in Revelation, do not allow that Peter had any kind of “preeminence” or “primacy”. In both instances, he is at the same level with all the other apostles. If we allow the principle that “Scripture interprets Scripture” (as
Irenaeus clearly said), consider all the parallels between Reuben, the
oldest son of Jacob, and Peter, which are far more explicit than any “typological”
representations of Mary in the Old Testament.
Reuben was
the first, Peter was the first. Reuben was “preeminent in dignity and
preeminent in power”. Peter, it is claimed, has those characteristics [his name
is mentioned first in lists of the Apostles].
Yet in Revelation
4:4, Peter is explicitly compared with Reuben:
Surrounding the throne were twenty-four
other thrones, and seated on them were twenty-four elders. They were dressed in
white and had crowns of gold on their heads.
This is no
mere “typological” identification of Peter with Reuben. What’s understood about
Mary and the Old Testament can be seen far, far more clearly in the
identification of Peter with Reuben. The clear implication is that the 12
tribes of Israel were the “foundation” of Israel, and the twelve Apostles were
the foundation of the Church. These are clearly (and not merely implicitly) being
equated.
And yet, of Reuben, it is explicitly said
that Reuben “will
not have preeminence” because of his sin.
“Reuben, you are my firstborn,
my might, and the firstfruits of my strength,
preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power.
Unstable
as water, you shall not have preeminence,
because you went up to your father's bed;
then you defiled it—he went up to my couch!
Peter
sinned, too, more grievously than Reuben sinned. The great forgiveness of Jesus,
offered in John 21, was really a replacing him on his Apostolic throne, from
which he could serve as one of the foundation stones of Ephesians 4 (and
foundations are all on the same level), and one of the 24 Elders.
“Unstable as
water”, you still are my firstborn son. But you “will not have preeminence”. The
same thing was said to Peter. This is confirmed in the writings of both Paul and John. The Old Testament comparison is a direct, one-to-one equating
of Peter with Reuben. If Roman Catholics want to find Mary in the Old
Testament, they certainly must find Peter there.
Great article, John (or Steve) I have also heard the allusion to Peter's "keys" being foreshadowed in Isa 22:22.
ReplyDeleteSo why can't we say the split of Israel/Judah, or Elijah's remnant are foreshadows of the Reformation?