On the Rock of Faith

There's something I really don't understand, and it's the root of the problem for me when it comes to Catholics. I'd rather sooner call them Petrians instead of Christians. What I don't get is why they choose to follow a... a... stupid head like Peter instead of following Christ.

I'm reading, as part of my homework tonight, the declaration of excommunication for Henry IV by Pope Gregory VII, and at the end he says, "...I bind him thus as commissioned by thee, that the nations may know and be convinced that thou art Peter and that upon thy rock the son of the living God has built his Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (As cited in Sources of 'The Making of the West', edited by Katharine Lualdi, pg. 195) He's writing this declaration to Peter. Not Christ, not God, but Peter. This rock to which he refers is mentioned in Matthew 16:15-18 (KJV):

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for the flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Okay, so there it is. Christ calls on Peter to be the foundation of His church. That doesn't change the fact that Peter isn't actually the one in charge. It's like... a coach. I don't use sports analogies very often, but to me this reads less like 'Build a church and have people pray to you and excommunicate in your name' and more like 'I have this group of people who are going to need a leader to keep up the good work.' Peter isn't the one to be prayed to, Christ is still the foundation, Peter may just be a cornerstone. Or, and here's the sports analogy I just mentioned, Christ owns a basketball team and Peter coaches. Respect the coach, but essentially it's Christ who owns you, right?

So why pray to Peter? Why worship saints at all? If there's one thing the Byzantines got right, it's iconoclasm. God commanded that we have no other gods before Him. Christ said follow him. What are saints but other people who, while reputable and good examples, are little more than... well... other people. They're just as susceptible to sin as we are. Augustine thrived in debauchery for a long time, for crying out loud. While I love reading Augustine, it's not his example that I want to follow most. These relics and symbols that Catholics cling to are idolatrous and go against everything Christ stood for. You want idols? I hear the cult of Demeter is recruiting in Greece...

Besides that, Peter was a fool. In the chapter before, he asks Christ to explain a parable (Matt. 15:15-20). I can just imagine Christ's frustration written all over his face as if to say, "You've been hanging around with me for how long, and you still don't get it? Are you even listening?!" If Peter doesn't get it, how can we expect him to be a good leader, especially if it's all guesswork on his part after Christ leaves? This guy is less and less a candidate for church leadership by the minute. His saving grace is that he loves Christ and is a worthy disciple, if not also a little slow.

Let's get back to Matthew 16. In the footnotes of my Bible, it makes mention of the wordplay so characteristic of Christ's way of teaching. 'Peter' is derived from the Greek word 'petros' which means 'small rock'. Okay, so Peter is a rock, that's clear enough, but let's back up a second and take in the whole passage, because the grammar doesn't match up. He (Christ) says "thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church". My NIV translation also has that grammatic stylization, "... you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church". Christ is clearly not saying "and on you I will build my church". So what's the second rock he is refering to? If we know Christ's style of teaching, it's always allegorical and through parallels. If He meant Peter to be the second rock, he would have said so.

In verse seventeen, the second rock is revealed. It's the response given to Peter's testimony of the Christ. "... For flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." That is the rock. It's Rock's rock. It's his testimony which will act as the foundation for the church and indeed for the faith of all Christians. Christ isn't giving over the glory to Peter. He can't be both coach and owner of the team. The rock is the revelation from God, by the Holy Ghost, that Christ is the savior.

So then, shouldn't our faith be built on the rock of testimony rather than the organization of a church? Not if you're Catholic apparently. Based on how I see Catholics live, it is by the politics of their church rather than their own personal faith in God anyway. There seems to be more emphasis on ritual than on living by pure faith and testimony. A sad way to go about existence, if you ask me.