How do the church fathers reconcile the accounts of Jesus calling Peter and Andrew to be apostles?

score:4

Accepted answer

One of my favorite go-to books on this kind of topic is St. Augustine's De Consensu Evangelistarum, which includes a chapter on the calling of the apostles. The full chapter is worth a read, but here is my breakdown of it as it applies to this specific question.

Statement of the Difficulty

37 The question may indeed be raised as to how John gives us this account of the calling of the disciples, which is to the effect that, certainly not in Galilee, but in the vicinity of the Jordan, Andrew first of all became a follower of the Lord, together with another disciple whose name is not declared; that, in the second place, Peter got that name from Him; and thirdly, that Philip was called to follow Him; whereas the other three evangelists, in a satisfactory concord with each other, Matthew and Mark in particular being remarkably at one here, tell us that the men were called when they were engaged in fishing.

. . .

It may indeed be supposed to bring before us a contradiction of no slight importance. For if it be the case that in the vicinity of the Jordan, and before Jesus went into Galilee, two men, on hearing the testimony of John the Baptist, followed Jesus [John]; that of these two disciples the one was Andrew, who at once went and brought his own brother Simon to Jesus; and that on this occasion that brother received the name Peter, by which he was thereafter to be called—how can it be said by the other evangelists that He found them engaged in fishing in Galilee, and called them there to be His disciples [Synoptics]?

Augustine's proposed solution

How can these diverse accounts be reconciled, unless it be that we are to understand that those men did not gain such a view of Jesus on the occasion connected with the vicinity of the Jordan as would lead them to attach themselves to Him for ever, but that they simply came to know who He was, and, after their first wonder at His Person, returned to their former engagements?

He goes on to mention that the "disciples" mentioned in John's account (those who were at the wedding of Cana and went down with him to Capharnaum do not necessarily refer to the apostles. He also mentions that the account of Matthew of the calling does not include a strict "after" chronology.

More post

Search Posts

Related post