The Twelfth Sunday after Trinity is August 27, 2023.

The readings for Year A can be found here, which were the readings for the preceding Sunday in 2020.

The Gospel reading is as follows (emphases mine):

Matthew 16:13-20

16:13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?”

16:14 And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

16:15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”

16:16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

16:17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.

16:18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.

16:19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

16:20 Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.

Last Sunday’s Gospel reading was from Matthew 15 (see here and here). In verse 21, Matthew tells us:

15:21 Jesus left that place and went away to the district of Tyre and Sidon.

He left Galilee with His disciples for several reasons: the crowds wanted to make Him king; the Jewish hierarchy actively opposed Him; and Herod Antipas, the ruler of that region, had beheaded John the Baptist and would have murdered Jesus if only he could have met Him.

Now Jesus was in Caesarea Philippi, asking His disciples who people in the crowds said He — the Son of Man — was (verse 13).

John MacArthur tells us more:

Now, in this passage of holy Scripture, we come to the climax, the apex, the high point of Jesus’ endeavor to teach the disciples. It is final examination moment. And the final examination the Lord gives them really only has one question, and you either pass or fail. When Jesus said to them in verse 15, “Who say ye that I am?” He really asked the ultimate question, a question that every human being on the face of the earth must face: Who is Jesus Christ? And on the answer to that question hinges eternal destiny …

For two years plus, our Lord has been moving to this moment, teaching, reteaching, affirming, reaffirming, establishing, reestablishing, building and rebuilding their confidence, their commitment, until ultimately Peter, on behalf of all of them, can say, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” It is a monumental moment in the ministry of our Lord and the life of His disciples …

You’ll remember that for some weeks and even months, Jesus has sought seclusion away from the misguided multitudes who wanted to make Him a political ruler, away from the hatred and animosity, the jealous ambition of Herod who wanted to do away with Him, away from the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the scribes who saw Him as a threat to their religious security, He has sought to be away from that.

But not only because of the negative pressure, also because of the positive need to teach and instruct and build up His disciples for that which was to come in a matter of a few months, the cross and all of the surrounding events.

And so, as we see Him here, He is moving into a ministry of devoted time given to the twelve. He has for some months primarily spent His time in the gentile areas, surrounding the northern and eastern part of the Sea of Galilee, and He’s had much fruit there and some time to be with them. And as we approach this text, we find Him withdrawing even further away to a more obscure place in order that He might focus in a greater way on their needs and the lessons for them.

MacArthur gives us more information about Caesarea Philippi, ruled by one of Herod Antipas’s two brothers, Philip the Tetrarch:

Now, when you hear the word Caesarea, you can just simply note that it means of Caesar. It is a town named for Caesar. There is a Caesarea down on the coast at this particular time in history, it is down almost directly west of the city of Jerusalem. This is another Caesarea, also named for Caesar, and called Caesarea Philippi to distinguish it from the Caesarea down in the southern and western part of the land of Palestine. A little background will help you to understand the setting.

The northernmost point in the land of Palestine, historically, was identified by the term Dan. The southernmost point was identified by the term Beersheba. And so, when wanting to encompass the whole land, we say the land extended from Dan to Beersheba – you’ve heard that. The very northeastern corner was Dan. Two and a half miles west of Dan was a town known as Panias. Now, Panias was named for Pan. Pan was a Greek god, supposedly born in a cave in that area. That also was the area where the headwaters of the Jordan started.

But to give you a little geography, if you were at the north end of the Sea of Galilee and you proceeded 25 miles north and east, you would go up above sea level about 17 hundred feet to a plateau. And that plateau stretches out along the foot of Mount Hermon. Mount Hermon ascends into the sky about 9,232 feet, it’s snow covered most all of the year, and is in full view of the villages of the northern part of Galilee, including Cana, Nazareth, and the others.

But up on that plateau was the town of Panias, named for the Greek god Pan, who was believed to be born in one of the caves or grottos in the area. And, of course, it had become a center for this cult, it was one of the more modern of the cults in that area at that time, and had some great growth. Now, the town of Panias was occupied predominantly by gentiles, rather than Jews. Because it was on the very frontier of heathendom, and the very last outpost of Judaism, it tended to be dominated by the Greek influences.

Today that part of the world would be in the southwestern corner of what we know as Syria, but I think at this juncture in history, it’s under the control of Israel. Now, it was to that place that Jesus retreated. It would be a welcome retreat from the heat of the Galilean lowlands, it would be a welcome retreat from the pressure of the very Jewish society there, with all of the things that were going on.

It would also be a retreat from the influence of Herod, who was after Jesus Christ, without doubt, into the territory controlled by Philip the Tetrarch. Now, Philip the Tetrarch was a more just man, a more kind man, a more patient man, imposing no threat to Christ and His disciples. He was, however, committed to Caesar as indicated by the fact that he himself changed the name of Panias to Caesarea. He enlarged it. He sort of rebuilt much of it, and he turned it into a very nice place, named it after the Caesar. It was designated Caesarea Philippi because he was the one who enlarged it and to distinguish it from the other one.

Matthew Henry’s commentary explains why Jesus asked the question:

He enquires what people’s sentiments were concerning him: “Who do men say that I am? The Son of man?” (So I think it might better be read). “Do they own me for the Messiah?” He asks not, “Who do the scribes and Pharisees say that I am?” They were prejudiced against him, and said that he was a deceiver and in league with Satan; but, “Who do men say that I am?” He referred to the common people, whom the Pharisees despised. Christ asked this question, not as one that knew not; for if he knows what men think, much more what they say; nor as one desirous to hear his own praises, but to make the disciples solicitous concerning the success of their preaching, by showing that he himself was so. The common people conversed more familiarly with the disciples than they did with their Master, and therefore from them he might better know what they said. Christ had not plainly said who he was, but left people to infer it from his works, John 10 24, 25. Now he would know what inferences the people drew from them, and from the miracles which his apostles wrought in his name.

MacArthur adds:

He uses the term Son of man to refer to Himself – it, by the way, is used 80 plus times in the New Testament, and so it is the Lord’s most common designation of Himself, and although it is definitely a prophetic title of Messiah taken from Daniel 7:13 and 14, He uses it more as a sign of His humiliation, as a sign of His identification with humanity …

Jesus came into the world to reveal Himself, and now it’s time to find out what they were reading, in terms of that revelation. Who is this? Was His effort being rewarded? Could they carry on the Kingdom? …

I don’t think Jesus is really looking for an answer, I think this is a leading question. This is a set-up question. I don’t think He’s asking for information. He knew basically what they thought about Him, but He wanted out of the disciples’ mouth a clear statement of the wrong answer, and then He wanted to hit for the right answer and, therefore, make it stand out by contrast.

He wants the general opinions of men as they fall short of reality as a backdrop for the truth, which the disciples will give. And what He’s really seeking is the confession that they ought to make with their lips from their heart after nearly two and a half years of being with Him. He’s after a verdict. He’s after a confidence statement, a supreme confession of who He is. It’s time for that now, the lessons are over, the course has reached its climax, now is the test.

In response to our Lord’s question, the disciples replied with the names of John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah or one of the other prophets (verse 14).

MacArthur explains why people responded with those answers:

And some of them said, “Well, He’s John the Baptist,” and the disciples reported this to Him here. This was indicated to us in the fourteenth chapter – you remember? – verses 1 and 2. At that time, it says, “Herod the Tetrarch [Antipas] heard of the fame of Jesus,” – of course, he had beheaded John – “and he said to his servants, this is John the Baptist, he’s risen from the dead and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him.”

Herod said, “It’s John the Baptist, back from the dead.” Now, why did he say that? Well, because John the Baptist was a prophet, John the Baptist was declaring the coming of Messiah, and Jesus did works that were inexplicable if – if defined humanly. So, what he is saying, really, by saying, “This is John the Baptist, back from the dead,” he is saying this is the one who’s announcing the coming of the Messiah, the one who does these mighty deeds must be one who’s come back from heaven. He saw the parallel in the ministries and then he equated the fact that this must be John risen from the dead.

And undoubtedly this was more popular than just with Herod. There were a lot of people who thought Jesus was John come back from the dead. Now, mark this in your mind, two things stick out about that. One, that he was the forerunner of the Messiah and not the Messiah, and two, that he was risen from the dead. They picked John the Baptist for their opinion because he was a forerunner to the Messiah and because having been risen from the dead, it explained how He could do the supernatural things He did – at least to them.

There’s another opinion – look at verse 14, “Some said you’re Elijah.” Elijah, of course, was the summit of the prophetic office. And the Old Testament in Malachi’s prophecy, chapter 4, verse 5, said, “Behold, I send you Elijah before that great and terrible Day of the Lord comes.” In other words, the Jews believed then that Elijah would come back from heaven, that Elijah would be resurrected, if we can use that term related to him. He would come back from heaven prior to the coming of Messiah. And so some said, “This is Elijah,” and again, please note, they say this based on the same thinking. One, he is a forerunner of the Messiah. Two, he is come back from the dead or come back from heaven.

By the way, if you were to go to a Jewish Passover today in 1982, you would see at the Jewish Passover table, an empty chair, and if you were to ask the host why there is an empty chair during the Passover in which no one sits, he would tell you it is the chair for Elijah, and they are waiting for Elijah to show up because when he takes his seat, the Messiah is not far behind. And that’s based on Malachi 4.

Now, you’ll notice again in verse 14 that others said, “He’s Jeremiah.” Now, where did this come from? Well, if you have ever had occasion to read what’s known as the Apocrypha – you know, that’s the non-biblical writings that sometimes appear between the Old and the New Testament in a Roman Catholic Bible? That Apocrypha has a series of books in it called the Maccabees, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, basically named for Judas Maccabeus who was a great leader during that period of time after the end of the Old Testament before the start of the New.

And in there, there are many interesting stories and legends and so forth. One of them is fascinating. It is that Jeremiah, prior to the Babylonian captivity in 586 B.C., took the Ark of the Covenant and took the altar of incense out of the temple in order that the gentiles wouldn’t take it and desecrate it, and he hid it in Mount Nebo. And the legend and superstition says – and the Jews held onto this – that before the Messiah comes back to establish His Kingdom, Jeremiah will return and Jeremiah will go get the Ark of the Covenant and he will go get the altar of incense and restore them to their place, and then the Messiah will come.

In fact, during the Maccabean period, you can read in 2 Maccabees a supposed account of where Jeremiah did appear. It pictures him as a man with a great white beard, gray hair, glorious appearance, and he comes down and he takes a golden sword and he gives it to Judas Maccabeus, and Judas Maccabeus uses that sword to lead the Maccabean revolution and overthrow the Greeks. And so Jeremiah had become a hero to them. It’s interesting, isn’t it? Because when he was a prophet, they threw him in a pit to get rid of him but all of a sudden he’s a hero.

And so many of the Jews were looking for Jeremiah to come back so that he could restore the Ark and the altar to its rightful place. And again, you have the same two factors. One is that they were looking for one who was a forerunner of the Messiah. Two, that he would be one who came back from the grave, or back from heaven, back from life with God, which was the only way they could explain his ability to do miraculous works.

Henry points out the irony of people identifying Jesus with a prophet from the Old Testament:

Or, one of the prophets. This shows what an honourable idea they entertained of the prophets; and yet they were the children of them that persecuted and slew them, ch. 23 29. Rather than they would allow Jesus of Nazareth, one of their own country, to be such an extraordinary Person as his works bespoke him to be, they would say, “It was not he, but one of the old prophets.“

Jesus probed the disciples further, asking them who they thought He was (verse 15).

Henry gives us an analysis of our Lord’s question as well as an application for our times:

1. The disciples had themselves been better taught than others; had, by their intimacy with Christ, greater advantages of getting knowledge than others had. Note, It is justly expected that those who enjoy greater plenty of the means of knowledge and grace than others, should have a more clear and distinct knowledge of the things of God than others. Those who have more acquaintance with Christ than others, should have truer sentiments concerning him, and be able to give a better account of him than others. 2. The disciples were trained up to teach others, and therefore it was highly requisite that they should understand the truth themselves: “Ye that are to preach the gospel of the kingdom, what are your notions of him that sent you?” Note, Ministers must be examined before they be sent forth, especially what their sentiments are of Christ, and who they say that he is; for how can they be owned as ministers of Christ, that are either ignorant or erroneous concerning Christ? This is a question we should every one of us be frequently putting to ourselves, “Who do we say, what kind of one do we say, that the Lord Jesus is? Is he precious to us? Is he in our eyes the chief of ten thousand? Is he the Beloved of our souls?” It is well or ill with us, according as our thoughts are right or wrong concerning Jesus Christ.

MacArthur would agree:

You will answer that question, my friend, you are answering that question right this very moment, and your eternal destiny depends upon the answer you give. You can’t avoid the question. You are pinned against the wall of eternity, and you will be forced to answer that question.

Our two commentators are so right. I reckon that few clergymen from the established denominations can answer that question. You can get close or you can give the perfect response. Most clergy today will get close. After all, they would not wish to offend anyone on earth, yet, in vacillating or giving half an answer, offend the heavenly One they purport to represent.

Simon Peter, the leader of the Apostles, answered in all boldness, ‘You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God’ (verse 16).

Henry says:

Peter’s answer is short, but it is full, and true, and to the purpose; Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Here is a confession of the Christian faith, addressed to Christ, and so made an act of devotion. Here is a confession of the true God as the living God, in opposition to dumb and dead idols, and of Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent, whom to know is life eternal. This is the conclusion of the whole matter.

MacArthur elaborates:

One-question final examination, “Who do you say that I am?” And that’s every person’s final examination. “And Simon Peter answered and said, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’” Simon Peter, the spokesman, wasn’t he? Chrysostom, the saint of old, called him the director of the apostolic choir. He was always up front. He was the mouthpiece. Whenever there was some speaking to be done, he did it.

In chapter 15: “Then answered Peter and said to Him, ‘Explain to us this parable.’” Peter said: “To whom shall we go? Thou and thou alone hast the words of eternal life.” In chapter 19, verse 27, Peter said: “Behold, we have forsaken all and followed thee, what shall we have therefore?” Peter was the spokesman. You see it in chapter 26. You see it many places. It was just his role to speak, and he articulated the consensus of the group.

This isn’t just Peter, this is Peter gathering up the consensus of the – of the disciples, speaking in their behalf. I like the fact that it calls him Simon Peter. It gives a very official character to the confession. This is a very official, formal confession. Simon Peter, his full name, says: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” It’s a formal confession, and it demands a formal designation, not an off­handed one. This is the consensus.

Jesus blessed Simon Peter for elucidating that truth, ‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven’ (verse 17).

He used the Apostle’s original name — Simon bar Jonah, in Hebrew — to further emphasise that that he came to that truth through divine revelation.

Henry provides us with this analysis:

Christ shows himself well pleased with Peter’s confession, that it was so clear and express, without ifs or ands, as we say. Note, The proficiency of Christ’s disciples in knowledge and grace is very acceptable to him; and Christ shows him whence he received the knowledge of this truth. At the first discovery of this truth in the dawning of the gospel day, it was a mighty thing to believe it; all men had not this knowledge, had not this faith. But,

First, Peter had the happiness of it; Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona. He reminds him of his rise and original, the meanness of his parentage, the obscurity of his extraction; he was Bar-jonas—The son of a dove; so some. Let him remember the rock out of which he was hewn, that he may see he was not born to this dignity, but preferred to it by the divine favour; it was free grace that made him to differ. Those that have received the Spirit must remember who is their Father, 1 Sam 10 12. Having reminded him of this, he makes him sensible of his great happiness as a believer; Blessed art thou. Note, True believers are truly blessed, and those are blessed indeed whom Christ pronounces blessed; his saying they are so, makes them so. “Peter, thou art a happy man, who thus knowest the joyful sound,” Ps 89 15. Blessed are your eyes, ch. 13 16. All happiness attends the right knowledge of Christ.

Secondly, God must have the glory of it; “For flesh and blood have not revealed it to thee. Thou hadst this neither by the invention of thy own wit and reason, nor by the instruction and information of others; this light sprang neither from nature nor from education, but from my Father who is in heaven.” Note, 1. The Christian religion is a revealed religion, has its rise in heaven; it is a religion from above, given by inspiration of God, not the learning of philosophers, nor the politics of statesmen. 2. Saving faith is the gift of God, and, wherever it is, is wrought by him, as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, for his sake, and upon the score of his mediation, Phil 1 29. Therefore thou art blessed, because my Father has revealed it to thee. Note, The revealing of Christ to us and in us is a distinguishing token of God’s good will, and a firm foundation of true happiness; and blessed are they that are thus highly favoured.

Perhaps Christ discerned something of pride and vain-glory in Peter’s confession; a subtle sin, and which is apt to mingle itself even with our good duties. It is hard for good men to compare themselves with others, and not to have too great a conceit of themselves; to prevent which, we should consider that our preference to others is no achievement of our own, but the free gift of God’s grace to us, and not to others; so that we have nothing to boast of, Ps 115 1; 1 Cor 4 7.

Jesus then said to the Apostle — with an emphatic ‘I will tell you’ — that he is Peter, which means ‘rock’, and on this rock He would build His Church, with the gates of Hades being unable to prevail against it (verse 18).

Henry discusses the relationship between Christ and the Church:

Such is the communion between Christ and the church, the Bridegroom and the spouse. God had a church in the world from the beginning, and it was built upon the rock of the promised Seed, Gen 3 15. But now, that promised Seed being come, it was requisite that the church should have a new charter, as Christian, and standing in relation to a Christ already come.

Henry goes on to explain verse 18:

Now the purport of this charter is,

First, To establish the being of the church; I say also unto thee. It is Christ that makes the grant, he who is the church’s Head, and Ruler, to whom all judgment is committed, and from whom all power is derived; he who makes it pursuant to the authority received from the Father, and his undertaking for the salvation of the elect. The grant is put into Peter’s hand; “I say it to thee.“ The Old Testament promises relating to the church were given immediately to particular persons, eminent for faith and holiness, as to Abraham and David; which yet gave no supremacy to them, much less to any of their successors; so the New-Testament charter is here delivered to Peter as an agent, but to the use and behoof of the church in all ages, according to the purposes therein specified and contained. Now it is here promised,

1. That Christ would build his church upon a rock. This body politic is incorporated by the style and title of Christ’s church. It is a number of the children of men called out of the world, and set apart from it, and dedicated to Christ. It is not thy church, but mine. Peter remembered this, when he cautioned ministers not to lord it over God’s heritage. The church is Christ’s peculiar, appropriated to him. The world is God’s, and they that dwell therein; but the church is a chosen remnant, that stands in relation to God through Christ as Mediator. It bears him image and superscription.

(1.) The Builder and Maker of the church is Christ himself; I will build it. The church is a temple which Christ is the Builder of, Zech 6 11-13. Herein Solomon was a type of Christ, and Cyrus, Isa 44 28. The materials and workmanship are his. By the working of his Spirit with the preaching of his word he adds souls to his church, and so builds it up with living stones, 1 Pet 2 5. Ye are God’s building; and building is a progressive work; the church in this world is but in fieri—in the forming, like a house in the building. It is a comfort to all those who wish well to the church, that Christ, who has divine wisdom and power, undertakes to build it.

(2.) The foundation on which it is built is, this Rock. Let the architect do his part ever so well, if the foundation be rotten, the building will not stand; let us therefore see what the foundation is, and it must be meant of Christ, for other foundation can no man lay. See Isa 28 16.

[1.] The church is built upon a rock; a firm, strong, and lasting foundation, which time will not waste, nor will it sink under the weight of the building. Christ would not build his house upon the sand, for he knew that storms would arise. A rock is high, Ps 61 2. Christ’s church does not stand upon a level with this world; a rock is large, and extends far, so does the church’s foundation; and the more large, the more firm; those are not the church’s friends that narrow its foundation.

[2.] It is built upon this rock; thou art Peter, which signifies a stone or rock; Christ gave him that name when he first called him (John 1 42), and here he confirms it; “Peter, thou dost answer thy name, thou art a solid, substantial disciple, fixed and stayed, and one that there is some hold of. Peter is thy name, and strength and stability are with thee. Thou art not shaken with the waves of men’s fluctuating opinions concerning me, but established in the present truth,” 2 Pet 1 12. From the mention of this significant name, occasion is taken for this metaphor of building upon a rock.

First, Some by this rock understand Peter himself as an apostle, the chief, though not the prince, of the twelve, senior among them, but not superior over them. The church is built upon the foundation of the apostles, Eph 2 20. The first stones of that building were laid in and by their ministry; hence their names are said to be written in the foundations of the new Jerusalem, Rev 21 14. Now Peter being that apostle by whose hand the first stones of the church were laid, both in Jewish converts (Acts 2.), and in the Gentile converts (Acts 10.), he might in some sense be said to be the rock on which it was built. Cephas was one that seemed to be a pillar, Gal 2 9 …

Secondly, Others, by this rock, understand Christ; “Thou art Peter, thou hast the name of a stone, but upon this rock, pointing to himself, I will build my church” … But this must be explained by those many scriptures which speak of Christ as the only Foundation of the church; see 1 Cor 3 11; 1 Pet 2 6. Christ is both its Founder and its Foundation; he draws souls, and draws them to himself; to him they are united, and on him they rest and have a constant dependence.

Thirdly, Others by this rock understand this confession which Peter made of Christ, and this comes all to one with understanding it of Christ himself. It was a good confession which Peter witnessed, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God; the rest concurred with him in it. “Now,” saith Christ, “this is that great truth upon which I will build my church.“ 1. Take away this truth itself, and the universal church falls to the ground. If Christ be not the Son of God, Christianity is a cheat, and the church is a mere chimera; our preaching is vain, your faith is vain, and you are yet in your sins, 1 Cor 15 14-17. If Jesus be not the Christ, those that own him are not of the church, but deceivers and deceived. 2. Take away the faith and confession of this truth from any particular church, and it ceases to be a part of Christ’s church, and relapses to the state and character of infidelity. This is articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesia—that article, with the admission or the denial of which the church either rises or falls; “the main hinge on which the door of salvation turns;” those who let go this, do not hold the foundation; and though they may call themselves Christians, they give themselves the lie; for the church is a sacred society, incorporated upon the certainty and assurance of this great truth; and great it is, and has prevailed.

As for the gates of Hades not prevailing against it:

2. Christ here promises to preserve and secure his church, when it is built; The gates of hell shall not prevail against it; neither against this truth, nor against the church which is built upon it.

(1.) This implies that the church has enemies that fight against it, and endeavour its ruin overthrow, here represented by the gates of hell, that is, the city of hell; (which is directly opposite to this heavenly city, this city of the living God), the devil’s interest among the children of men. The gates of hell are the powers and policies of the devil’s kingdom, the dragon’s head and horns, by which he makes war with the Lamb; all that comes out of hell-gates, as being hatched and contrived there. These fight against the church by opposing gospel truths, corrupting gospel ordinances, persecuting good ministers and good Christians; drawing or driving, persuading by craft or forcing by cruelty, to that which is inconsistent with the purity of religion; this is the design of the gates of hell, to root out the name of Christianity (Ps 83 4), to devour the man-child (Rev 12 9), to raze this city to the ground.

(2.) This assures us that the enemies of the church shall not gain their point. While the world stands, Christ will have a church in it, in which his truths and ordinances shall be owned and kept up, in spite of all the opposition of the powers of darkness; They shall not prevail against it, Ps 129 1, 2. This gives no security to any particular church, or church-governors that they shall never err, never apostatize or be destroyed; but that somewhere or other the Christian religion shall have a being, though not always in the same degree of purity and splendour, yet so as that the entail of it shall never be quite cut off. The woman lives, though in a wilderness (Rev 12 14), cast down but not destroyed (2 Cor 4 9). Corruptions grieving, persecutions grievous, but neither fatal. The church may be foiled in particular encounters, but in the main battle it shall come off more than a conqueror. Particular believers are kept by the power of God, through faith, unto salvation, 1 Pet 1 5.

Jesus said that He would give Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever was bound on earth would be bound in heaven, and whatever was loosed — forgiven — on earth would be forgiven in heaven (verse 19).

Henry, continuing his explanation, says:

Secondly, The other part of this charter is, to settle the order and government of the church, v. 19. When a city or society is incorporated, officers are appointed and empowered to act for the common good. A city without government is a chaos. Now this constituting of the government of the church, is here expressed by the delivering of the keys, and, with them, a power to bind and loose. This is not to be understood of any peculiar power that Peter was invested with, as if he were sole door-keeper of the kingdom of heaven, and had that key of David which belongs only to the Son of David; no, this invests all the apostles and their successors with a ministerial power to guide and govern the church of Christ, as it exists in particular congregations or churches, according to the rules of the gospel. Claves regni cælorum in B. Petro apostolo cuncti suscepimus sacerdotes—All we that are priests, received, in the person of the blessed apostle Peter, the keys of the kingdom of heaven; so Ambrose De Dignit. Sacerd. Only the keys were first put into Peter’s hand, because he was the first that opened the door of faith to the Gentiles, Acts 10 28. As the king, in giving a charter to a corporation, empowers the magistrates to hold courts in his name, to try matters of fact, and determine therein according to law, confirming what is so done regularly as if done in any of the superior courts; so Christ, having incorporated his church, hath appointed the office of the ministry for the keeping up of order and government, and to see that his laws be duly served; I will give thee the keys. He doth not say, “I have given them,” or “I do now;” but “I will do it,” meaning after his resurrection; when he ascended on high, he gave those gifts, Ephes 4 8; then this power was actually given, not to Peter only, but to all the rest, ch. 28 19, 20; John 20 21. He doth not say, The keys shall be given, but, I will give them; for ministers derive their authority from Christ, and all their power is to be used in his name, 1 Cor 5 4.

Now, 1. The power here delegated is a spiritual power; it is a power pertaining to the kingdom of heaven, that is, to the church, that part of it which is militant here on earth, to the gospel dispensation; that is it about which the apostolical and ministerial power is wholly conversant. It is not any civil, secular power that is hereby conveyed, Christ’s kingdom is not of this world; their instructions afterward were in things pertaining to the kingdom of God, Acts 1 3.

2. It is the power of the keys that is given, alluding to the custom of investing men with authority in such a place, by delivering to them the keys of the place. Or as the master of the house gives the keys to the steward, the keys of the stores where the provisions are kept, that he may give to every one in the house his portion of meat in due season (Luke 12 42), and deny it as there is occasion, according to the rules of the family. Ministers are stewards, 1 Cor 4 1; Tit 1 7. Eliakim, who had the key of the house of David, was over the household, Isa 22 22.

3. It is a power to bind and loose, that is (following the metaphor of the keys), to shut and open. Joseph, who was lord of Pharaoh’s house, and steward of the stores, had power to bind his princes, and to teach his senators wisdom, Ps 105 21, 22. When the stores and treasures of the house are shut up from any, they are bound, interdico tibi aquœ et igne—I forbid thee the use of fire and water; when they are opened to them again, they are loosed from that bond, are discharged from the censure, and restored to their liberty.

4. It is a power which Christ has promised to own the due administration of; he will ratify the sentences of his stewards with his own approbation; It shall be bound in heaven, and loosed in heaven: not that Christ hath hereby obliged himself to confirm all church-censures, right or wrong; but such as are duly passed according to the word, clave non errante—the key turning the right way, such are sealed in heaven; that is, the word of the gospel, in the mouth of faithful ministers, is to be looked upon, not as the word of man, but as the word of God, and to be received accordingly, 1 Thess 2 13; John 12 20.

Now the keys of the kingdom of heaven are,

(1.) The key of doctrine, called the key of knowledge. “Your business shall be to explain to the world the will of God, both as to truth and duty; and for this you shall have your commissions, credentials, and full instructions to bind and loose:” these, in the common speech of the Jews, at that time, signified to prohibit and permit; to teach or declare a thing to be unlawful was to bind; to be lawful, was to loose. Now the apostles had an extraordinary power of this kind; some things forbidden by the law of Moses were now to be allowed, as the eating of such and such meats; some things allowed there were now to be forbidden, as divorce; and the apostles were empowered to declare this to the world, and men might take it upon their words. When Peter was first taught himself, and then taught others, to call nothing common or unclean, this power was exercised. There is also an ordinary power hereby conveyed to all ministers, to preach the gospel as appointed officers; to tell people, in God’s name, and according to the scriptures, what is good, and what the Lord requires of them: and they who declare the whole counsel of God, use these keys well, Acts 20 27.

Some make the giving of the keys to allude to the custom of the Jews in creating a doctor of the law, which was to put into his hand the keys of the chest where the book of the law was kept, denoting his being authorized to take and read it; and the binding and loosing, to allude to the fashion about their books, which were in rolls; they shut them by binding them up with a string, which they untied when they opened them. Christ gives his apostles power to shut or open the book of the gospel to people, as the case required. See the exercise of this power, Acts 13 46; 18 6. When ministers preach pardon and peace to the penitent, wrath and the curse to the impenitent, in Christ’s name, they act then pursuant to this authority of binding and loosing.

(2.) The key of discipline, which is but the application of the former to particular persons, upon a right estimate of their characters and actions. It is not legislative power that is hereby conferred, but judicial; the judge doth not make the law, but only declares what is law, and upon an impartial enquiry into the merits of the cause, gives sentence accordingly. Such is the power of the keys, wherever it is lodged, with reference to church-membership and the privileges thereof. [1.] Christ’s ministers have a power to admit into the church; “Go, disciple all nations, baptizing them; those who profess faith in Christ, and obedience to him, admit them and their seed members of the church by baptism.” Ministers are to let in to the wedding-feast those that are bidden; and to keep out such as are apparently unfit for so holy a communion. [2.] They have a power to expel and cast out such as have forfeited their church-membership, that is binding; refusing to unbelievers the application of gospel promises and the seals of them; and declaring to such as appear to be in the gall of bitterness and bond of iniquity, that they have no part or lot in the matter, as Peter did to Simon Magus, though he had been baptized; and this is a binding over to the judgment of God. [3.] They have a power to restore and to receive in again, upon their repentance, such as had been thrown out; to loose those whom they had bound; declaring to them, that, if their repentance be sincere, the promise of pardon belongs to them. The apostles had a miraculous gift of discerning spirits; yet even they went by the rule of outward appearances (as Acts 8 21; 1 Cor 5 1; 2 Cor 2 7; 1 Tim 1 20), which ministers may still make a judgment upon, if they be skilful and faithful.

Then Jesus sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone He was the Messiah (verse 20).

Henry lists several reasons why Jesus commanded this:

They must tell no m