The Apostles have gone back to their old method of earning a living (Augustine, Gregory the Great). Jesus reveals himself to them, but not immediately as he does not want to frighten them (Chrysostom). The symbolism of their not catching any fish is noted by all the Patristic commentators, as is the fact that Jesus addresses them as children – which is the ideal mindset for discipleship (Clement). The Fathers also note that when the follow the word of the Lord, this changes and they have great success – the fish multiplied, even as Christian multiply where the word is preached (Augustine). It is the more contemplative John who first recognises Jesus, but Peter, the more fervent, who first comes to him (Chrysostom). It is, naturally, Peter who plunges headlong into the water in search of the pearl of great price (Ephrem). Jesus eats fish with them to show, again, that he is no phantasm (Jerome). The fish he serves them is the first fruits of his catch (Cyril).
There are any number of symbolic interpretations of the number of fish – 153. Augustine sees it as a symbol for the fulness of the grace of all those who partake of the Spirit, as Peter brings the catch for the fulness of the Gentiles (100) and the elect of Israel (50) for the glory of the Trinity (3) (Augustine). Or some see it as pertaining to the end of the world, using an arithmetical triangle that utilizes the prime number 17. The unbroken nets symbolise the unified church unbroken by schism. Christ came in from the sea, which is the world, tossed about, onto the solid shore which is the Church (Gregory). He then commits the Church to Peter, since he is the one who brings the catch safely to shore where there is true rest. (Gregory).
The disciples are in awe of him because he no longer shields his divine power from them (Chrysostom). Just like the meal they consumed, Christ is the broiled fish who suffered and is consumed; he is the bread that came down from heaven (Augustine). The seven disciples present for this meal signify the future eschatological banquet when all things will be brought to perfection (Gregory). John speaks of this as the third time, which is a reference to the manifestations, and not the number of days. These appearances make us look forward even more to our own resurrection (Chrysostom).
Jesus deals gently with Peter – he neither brings up his denials, neither does he reproach him for his failures (Chrysostom). Peter’s threefold denial is now replaced by a threefold confession (Jerome) which effaces his offence (Ambrose) and restores him. He is restored by the Good Shepherd and then called, along with those ministers who follow him, to feed his lambs (Augustine). This is how we show the lobe Christ was asking for from Peter – by serving our neighbour and tending each other (Chrysostom).
Peter is reminded, as all pastors are reminded, that these are not their sheep, they belong to Jesus, and they should remember their fall so they practice mercy to others (Augustine). The Fathers all note that Peter is shaken and made more cautious by the questioning. They also note the nature of the commission. To feed Christ’s sheep is to feed the faith of those who believe in him by exercising proper pastoral care (Bede). The threefold denial and threefold confession mirrors the name of the Trinity, used thrice in baptism. Our Lord’s questioning and Peter’s confession of love ends in the call for a selfless love that focuses on God and neighbour and not oneself (Augustine). Peter is called to serve even unto death – and so must all pastors if that is necessary to defend the sheep (Gregory).
Peter is now willing to suffer for Jesus in his older years in a way he was not when he was young (Chrysostom). The Fathers all reflect the tradition received in the Church of Peter’s martyrdom in Rome, and his crucifixion, upside down, by Nero. Thus it is that Peter will fulfil his promise that he would die for the Lord. Now the hour is coming for them all when, tried by events, they will give all they have for the Lord.
All Along the Watchtower 
the tradition received in the Church of Peter’s martyrdom in Rome, and his crucifixion, upside down, by Nero.
Oh , never mind. I was going to say that im having trouble findings Peter crucified upside down….but I see its a tradition, not scripture.
LikeLike
Yes, it’s why we know he’s dead. Unless you want to take the ludicrous view that as Scripture does not tell us he’s dead he’s still alive.
LikeLike
I was told, a long time ago, that Peter was crucified upside down , and I believed it. Then someone pointed out that they couldn’t find it.
We know he died because not to many people live 2000 yrs.
LikeLike
Yes, but on your ludicrous insistence that if it isn’t in Scripture it’s not verified, that would not matter.
As early as the end of the first century there was a record of Peter’s death in Rome. why this is a problem for you, only you know.
LikeLike
Where good brother Peter died has no significance for salvation. Its not mentioned where he died. Peters ministry was upward and to the east alittle I understand. Any claim to know how and where he died is just that….a guess. Anyway, there was some guy who claimed to be Simon Peter in Rome. He was some wanna be miracle maker.
LikeLike
No, there have been excavations which show he is buried where tradition says. The reason you have a problem with it and have to deny history and archaeology is it is yet another example of the Church and its tradition being accurate. Newman was right, to be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant. From your own point of view best remain ignorant of history – you might end up in the Church Christ founded.
LikeLike
I used to think Peter was buried in Rome. My tour guide pointed out where he was buried. But now that I am able to think things thru, I doubt if a flagrant lawbreaker criminal such as a Christian was given a final resting place with a tombstone in Neros part of town. He would have been burned as a street light or prepaired as Purina Lion Food. But, don’t let that get in the way of the endless line of traditions you hold near and dear.
LikeLike
Who said he was, and as he was buried originally in the catacombs, not sure what the problem with that was. Jesus wasn’t fed to wild animals, why would Peter have been? Do try to make sense.
LikeLike
Oh by the way…..we do know good brother Paul died in Rome. He was the greatest apostle. Wheres his big neon sign lit up grave site?
LikeLike
Try here: http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2009/10/08/New-Discoveries-Relating-to-the-Apostle-Paul.aspx#Article
Yes again, archaeology confirms what tradition teaches. Watch out Bosco, this getting interested in history will lead you into the Church.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A great article. I must have missed this when it happened. I am glad to have an answer to that question.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My pleasure 😄
LikeLiked by 1 person
May I ask a question……why is your “church” so obsessed with dead mens bones?
Your link says…..
While these results fall short of proving conclusively that the Apostle Paul’s remains are entombed in the church, they are consistent with the traditions and leave open the opportunity for further investigations
Good brother, you use the word “probably” as if it were written in stone. In your haste to justify any and every tradition of your religion, you toss solid archeology to the wind. You make history fit the fable. Well, as long as no one calls you on it, youre safe.
LikeLike
Not at all. Unlike you, we honour the dead. As we can’t DNA the bones nothing can be proven. Looks like you’re feeling threatened by history – no proble, greater sinners than you have been brought to the True Church by God’s Grace.
LikeLike
Honoring the dead means digging up their bones and putting them on display?
LikeLike
‘If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’
God does not give definitive proof as He always leaves room for faith which is an expression of trust. We trust the Gospels, though we have no proof. We trust the early fathers, though we have no proof. We trust the traditions that were accepted by the Church, though we have no proof. We trust the Holy Spirit because Christ told us that it would lead the Church to all Truth. Without trust, there is no faith and no hope. Both are built upon this. Sorry you have no trust and that your faith and hope is thus weak. But perhaps Christ will show you his wounds like Thomas . . . but will it do you any good? Apparently, God did not think that Dives brothers would believe even if Lazarus was sent to them to explain what lay in store for them. Perhaps it is the same for you?
LikeLiked by 2 people
The proof is being born again. If any man boast , let him boast in the Lord.
I cant boast about being born again, because I didn’t want to be born again.
Proof is being changed and given a new spirit. The new saint is then led by the Spirit to ALL truths.
You trust your traditions of men. Jesus said that these traditions make the Word of god none effect. You honor Him with your lips but your heart is far from him.
LikeLike
Jesus founded a Church. The traditions include the Bible. No idea who founded your branch of MacChapel, but I’d not risk my immortal soul on a feeling something happened to me which meant I was saved.
LikeLike
That’s sad. Lucky you, you just might get saved despite you.
LikeLike
Jesus saves, he founded a Church – all in the Bible in his words. Can’t find him saying to Ronald MacCalvary ‘feed my sheep’ – you don’t need luck, you need Jesus and his church – just knock and ye shall find.
LikeLike
If it was a proof, everyone who heard or saw what happened to you would believe (not through faith but through scientific analysis). It is no proof. It is your subjective demonstration to us which is unverifiable. Do I trust your experience as you interpret it? No. Do I trust that you had some kind of an experience? Yes.
When you have something you can send to the lab to be analyzed and directed that leaves no doubts . . . then you will have a proof.
LikeLiked by 1 person
An adulterous generation seeketh a sign(proof)
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’d be you then, Bosco.?
LikeLike
Like you with Paul or Peter’s deaths in Rome?
Problem is that you expect people to take you at your word alone . . . no one elses. Trust is developed when you demonstrate that you find yourself in agreement with people throughout salvation history. When you do not contradict them and you live a holy life of noteworthy heroism for the faith, you might find that you too could be counted among those whom the Church would declare as having an private revelation that is ‘worthy of belief.’ But since that isn’t going to happen we will just have to trust you. And who are you that we should trust? A man who thinks of himself as a clown as does everyone else. If you can’t show proof . . . at least demonstrate that you are in a long line of those whom show continuity in their teaching and in their objective lives. But since you stand out of this line of objective followers of Christ . . . and have broken with them . . . you stand outside preaching your own gospel. If Christ is knocking at your door, He would lead you to His Church. He did found a Church just for the heck of it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The last line should have said “didn’t” not did . . . just in case you were wondering.
LikeLike
Since when did you religious folks care about proof?
1. You say the traditions of wearing Babylonian dagon dress for the priests originated from Jesus teaching after he rose again.
Wheres the proof?
2. Mary was assumed to heaven
Wheres any proof?
3. You say Mary was sinless.
Wheres the proof.
4. You say Peter was the first Pope, and wore a big shiney robe and sat on a big glitzy throne.
Wheres the proof?
The only “proof you have for that is a pagan statue of Jupiter on some throne making a satanic hand sign with a roman pagan symbol of deity, the halo, behind his bronze head.
So, I guess we are even. (;-D
LikeLike
I already explained it to you or are you having a hard time reading. We TRUST our sources for good reason. Proofs are not something that God does often but He does verify at times with miracles which you will dismiss as hocus pocus. So there is nothing else God can do unless you admit that perhaps God is revealing Himself in a reasonable way that still requires you to TRUST in Him and in others who TRUSTED Him in a long line of succession. Yes, we believe the traditions of our older brothers and sisters in Christ who handed down this information. Do you think such teaching would have come from the Romans or Pagans who think just as you and would want to dismiss such thought? I think not. I’ll believe the traditions that were handed down from the survivors of all those who were persecuted in the past by non-Christians who hated the Church and all She stood for. You will as well unless God softens your stone heart.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ive never told anyone to take my word for anything. I tell people to ask Jesus for salvation for themselves. But I can give my testimony, which is all that I have. I don’t tell people that Christ is here , or Christ is there, or he is in secret chambers, like some people and religions I know. Verily, they shall have their reward.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Please produce a line of Christians over the last 2000 years that said that was all we have to do. Where is the continuity with the Christian faith which you have broken with? They all seem to be in the Church and show obedience to Christ and His Church. They too pray for Christ to enter into their hearts and He does. But it is not just that . . . privately, alone, in seclusion or separated from the Bride of Christ that they do it. No. They are in communion . . . which is something you do not understand at all . . . being out of communion. So your words, even from the Gospel, ring hollow as a one-liner for instant admittance into the club of the reborn saved persons. Sorry. But it never worked like that, you can’t show me a line of folks that says it works like that and you never will. Not even a simple demonstration like that is available to come to your aid.
LikeLike
Ive invited a couple of born again people to come in here and help me. They take a look and don’t want anything to do with this religious site. They wonder why I bother.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Me too Bosco. It doesn’t make sense because you reside outside of the Church. My only answer is that God is keeping you here as to give you as many chances as possible to give up your 1 man religion and actually decide to become a member of the Bride of Christ and do some good in this world.
LikeLike
One good thing ive always noted about you good brother Servus, is that you believe your religion is THE WAY and you make an effort to spread the word and invite people to share in this salvation. Faith without works is dead. You will make a good soldier for the Lord.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you Bosco and once you, yourself has turned, maybe you will strengthen your brothers and sisters as a fruitful member of Christ’s Church as well. Many are called but few are chosen, Bosco. He may choose you yet.
LikeLike
Yes, may he choose me.
LikeLike
No pope has ever definitively declared the fragments to belong to the apostle Peter, but Pope Paul VI in 1968 said fragments found in the necropolis under St Peter’s Basilica were “identified in a way that we can consider convincing”.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/24/vatican-st-peters-bones-display-pope-francis
We know that the Vatican is on a revered site of Romes pagan rituals. I think it was also the Circus Maximus. You want me to believe a criminal who said that Ceasar wasn’t god was to be buried in the holy place of pagan Rome? Your traditions that date back to the stone age are about as realistic as the rest of your religions practices.
LikeLike
When you are better read on the history of the catacombs, you are welcome to come back and apologise.
LikeLike
Ive walked thru the catacombs in rome, something I would never do again, because I realized later that I am clostrophobic. I even took that little train ride down the Saltzbury salt mine, again, I would never do that again. And the tour guide gave us a history of the tombes
Jesus is the Lord of the living. The CC is the religion of the dead and dead mens bones. Amazing that doesn’t throw up a red flag to you. Every now and then a cadaver is dug up and displayed on the Basiclica steps for the devotees to pray to. Lord have mercy…. how macabre do you guys wanna get. That’s just yucky. EEUUuuuuuuwww. you guys weirdos.
LikeLike
No, the Catholic Church is the religion of the Communion of Saints; those truly alive in Christ and will remain so forever. That the fallen saints no longer walk among us does not mean that they are not alive; they are more alive than we are at present. Your religion is one of the here and present. So you neither are Communion with the Church you are not within the Communion of Saints. In the Catholic Church we revel in the prospect that we will be in their company for all eternity.
LikeLike
Wow, what was that? Either one is born again or one isn’t.
LikeLike