1 Peter
Epistola B. Petri Apostoli PrimaIntroductions
Enciclopedia Cattolica
The author, who presents himself as "Peter an apostle of Jesus Christ," wishes an abundance of grace and peace "to the elect sojourners (that is, to the Christians who tend toward the heavenly homeland) living in the diaspora (scattered among the Gentiles) of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia" (1:1-2).
In the body of the letter he exhorts to a holy life for three principal reasons: 1) for the great benefits granted by God (1:3-2:10); 2) to edify and convert the Gentiles (2:11-14:4); 3) for the divine judgment that overhangs all (4:5-5:11).
They were always admitted among Catholics. In the prologue the author presents himself as Peter the apostle. From the context it results that the writer was an immediate disciple of Christ, a witness of the Savior's sufferings (5:1; 2:21-24). He distinguishes himself from those who believe in Christ without having seen him (1:8); he calls "my son" that Mark (v.) who, from the Acts of the Apostles (12:13) and from tradition, is presented as the spiritual son and "interpreter" of Peter. The author of the epistle shows the characteristics that the Gospels attribute to Peter: simplicity, united with a certain roughness, enthusiasm, fervent love, humility (5:5-6), sorrow for sins and great trust in divine mercy (1:3; 2:22-25; 5:10, 15).
Haydock
This first Epistle of St. Peter, though brief, contains much doctrine concerning faith, hope, and charity, with divers instructions to all persons of every state and condition. The apostle commands submission to rulers and superiors, and exhorts all to the practice of a virtuous life, in imitation of Christ. This epistle was written with such apostolical dignity, as to manifest the supreme authority with which its writer, the prince of the apostles, had been invested by his Lord and Master, Jesus Christ. He wrote it at Rome, which figuratively he calls Babylon, about fifteen years after our Lord's ascension. (Challoner) --- St. Peter, otherwise called Simon, son of John or Jonas, was from Bethsaida, a city of Galilee. He was married, and lived at Capharnaum, and was employed with his brother Andrew, as fishermen, when our Lord called them. St. Peter on every occasion testified a more than usual zeal for his Master, and hence our Lord shewed him a very particular and very marked attention. He would have Peter present at his transfiguration; (Luke 9:28.) and at another time declared that he[Peter] was a rock, upon which he[Jesus Christ] would build his Church, against which the gates of hell should never prevail. (Matthew 16:18.) Although St. Peter had the misfortune or weakness to deny Jesus Christ in his passion, our Lord, after his resurrection, gave him fresh proofs of his regard. (Matthew 16:7.) He continued him in his primacy over all, and appointed him in the most explicit manner visible head of his Church, when thrice asking Peter: "lovest thou me more than these?" and St. Peter as often answering, Christ said to him: "feed my lambs, feed my sheep." (John 11:15.) --- This epistle was always received in the Church as canonical, and as written by St. Peter, prince of the apostles. It is commonly agreed that it was written from Rome, which St. Peter calls Babylon, (Chap. 5:13.) and directed to those in the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, etc., (ver. 1.) who were before Jews or Gentiles, and had been converted to the Christian faith. It is certain this letter was not written till after the true believers had the name of Christians. (Chap. 4:16.) Many think it was written before the year 49[A.D. 49]; but this is not certain. Others judge not till after the year 60, and some not till a short time before he wrote his second epistle. See Tillemont, t. i. Art. 31. on S. Pet. and tom. ii. on S. Mark, p. 89. The main design is to confirm the new converts in the faith of Christ, with divers instructions to a virtuous life. (Witham) --- Grotius, Erasmus, and Estius, discover in this epistle, a strength and majesty worthy the prince of the apostles. Est autem epistola profecto digna Apostolorum Principe, plena authoritatis et majestatis Apostolicae: verbis parca, sententiis referta.
Douay 1582/1609
THE ARGVMENT OF BOTH THE EPISTLES OF S. PETER, THE FIRST, AND THE SECOND. 5 paragraphs
OF S. Peter vve reade at large, both in the Gospels, and in the Actes of the Apostles: and namely. that Christ designed him, •. 10. v. 2. and also made him his vicar (as S. Mathevv for that cause in the catalogue of the Apostles, calleth him Primus, the first, and all antiquitie. Princeps Apostolorum, the Prince of the Apostles) and that he accordingly executed that office after Christes departure, plating the Church first among the Ievves in Hierusalem and in al that countrey and coastes about, as Christ also him self before had preached to the Ievves alone.
But preaching at length to the Gentiles also, according to Christes commission (Mat. 28. v. 19.) and being novv come to Rome, the head citie of the Gentiles, from thence he vvriteth this Epistle to his Christian Ievves, hauing care of them in his absence, no lesse then vvhen he vvas present: and not to the Ievves, that vvere at home, (belike because they had S. Iames, or his successor S. Simon Cleoph•, resident vvith them) but to them that vvere dispersed in Pontus, 1 Pet. 1. Galatia, Cappadocia, and Bithynia.
And that he vvriteth it from Rome, 1 Pet. 5. him self signifieth, saying: The Church that is in Babylon saluteth you. See the Annotation 1 Pet. 5. v. 13. Vvhere by Babylon he meaneth Rome, as al antiquitie doth interpret him: not, that he so calleth the Church of Rome, but the heathen state of the Romane empire, vvhich then, and 300 yeres after, vnto the conuersion of Constantinus the Emperour, did persecute the elect Church of Rome, in so much that the first 33 Bishops thereof vnto S. Siluester, vvere al Martyrs.
For the matter vvhereof he vvriteth, him self doth signifie it in these vvordes: This loe the second Epistle I vvrite to you, 2 Pet. 3. my deerest, in vvhich (Epistles) I stirre vp by admonition, your sincere minde, that you may be mindeful of those vvordes &c. So he saith there of both together. And againe of the first to the same purpose, 1 Pet. 5. in an other place: I haue breefely vvritten, beseeching and testifying that this is the true grace of God, vvherein you stand. For, there vvere at that time certaine Seducers (as See the Annotatiō vpon S. Iames epistle c. 2. v. 21. S. August. also hath told vs) vvho vvent about to teach Onely faith, as though good vvorkes vvere not necessarie, nor meritorious. there vvere also great persecutions, to compel them vvith terrour to denie Christ & al his religiō. He therfore exhorteth thē accordingly, neither for persecution. neither by seduction to forsake it: though in the first, his exhortation is more principally against persecution: and in the second, more principally against seduction. The first epistle is noted to be very like to S. Paules epistle to the Ephesians, in vvordes also, and so thicke of Scriptures, as though he spake nothing els.
The time vvhen the first vvas vvritten, is vncertaine: the second vvas vvrittē a litle before his death, as is gathered by his vvordes in the same. c. 1. v. 14.
Cornely
hominibus excogitata cras ab iisdem reiicientur. Ceterum maior interpretum protestanticorum numerus hodie Iacobo fratri Domini epistolam attribuit, elsi multi ex iis, num lacobus hic fuerit Apostolus, dubitent; hanc vero quaestionem supra iam tractavimus.
2. Calvinus in praef. Commentarii epistolam pro authentica et canonica recepit : « Quia nullam eius repudiandae satis iustam causam video... Nihil continet Christi Apostolo indignum ; multiplici vero doctrina scatet, cuius utilitas ad omnes christianae vitae partes late patet ».
Continue reading 53 paragraphs
212. — I. ViTAM S. PETRI, APOSTOLORUM PRINCIPIS, cui auctori 9. et 3. catholicae epistolae attribuuntur, paucis absolvere nobis licet, quoniam multa, quae de eo sive in Evangeliis et Actibus sive a Patribus traduntur, variis in locis iam attigimus.
Simon, filius loannis, Bethsaidae prope lacum Genesareth natus post matrimonium suum, ut videtur, domicilium Capharnaum transtulerat ibique piscatoriam exercebat!. A fratre suo Andrea, qui loannis Bapt. discipulus fuerat et a magistro suo edoctus primus Iesum esse Messiam cognoverat, ad Dominum adductus ab eodem statim novo nomine Cephae i. e. Petri (petrae) imposito futuri sui muneris promissionem accepit?. Ad continuam autem Domini sequelam paullo post una cum fratre suo Andrea filiisque Zebedaei vocatus atque primus in Apostolorum collegium adscitus inter tres illos quoque discipulos, quos maiore amicitia et familiaritate dignabatur Dominus, primum locum occupavit?. Neque tanto honore indignum sese exhibuit; etsi enim pro humana infirmitate aliquando vacillaret eius constantia, nemo tamen tanto, quanto ille, cum ardore integrum sese Domino tradiderat. Dum in prima miraculosa piscatione stupebant reliqui, ipse humillimus ad Domini pedes procidens exclamat : « Exi a me, quia homo peccator sum »; quando in synagoga capharnaumitana post Domini de pane vitae sermonem etiam multi discipulorum abierunt retro, ipse pro reliquis Apostolis respondit : « Domine, ad quem ibimus? verba vitae aeternae habes et cognovimus, quia tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi »; atque iterum prope Caesaream Philippi prae reliquis et pro reliquis fidem suam in lesum, tamquam Christum, Filium Dei vivi, profitetur et velut praemium explicatione nominis impositi promissionem futuri primatus in Ecclesia obtinet *. Magistrum suum a passione subeunda dehortari quidem conatus erat; appropinquante tamen passione paratus erat cum eo « et in carcerem et in mortem ire », immo etiam gladio eum defendere ausus est. Solus cum Ioanne sequebatur Dominum usque in atrium summi pontificis; ibi quidem , quum suis nimis confisus esset viribus nec Domini monitum observasset, ter eum negavit, at peccatum vix patratum ad primum Domini aspectum cognovit et deflevit amare?. Dominum a morte resuscitatum unus ex primis videre meruit; in alia autem apparitione ad lacum Genesareth, simulatque eum in litore stare audivit, ex navicula in aquam sese deiecit, ut citius ad eum perveniret : atque ibidem pro praemio intimi sui amoris, quem humillimo modo ter profitetur, pastor supremus totius gregis Christi constituitur 9.
Ab illo tempore primatum a Christo ei collatum exercuit; post ascensionem enim in locum traditoris novum Apostolum sufficiendum esse monet, primus Evangelium lerosolymis annuntiat , primus miraculum patrat, primus coram synedrio fidem suam profitetur et pro Christi nomine patitur, primus membra Ecclesiae indigna punit, primus ethnicos in Ecclesiam recipit, velut pastor supremus ecclesias Palaestinae visitat, per Angelum, ut nascenti Ecclesiae diutius praeesse possit, manibus Herodis eripitur. Post quam miraculosam liberationem Scripturae de S. Petro fere tacent : ex Actibus tamen scimus, eum Concilio Apostolico interfuisse atque quaestionem dogmaticam, num Lex Ethnicochristianos obligaret, secundum eius votum, quod decretorium agnovit lacobus, esse diremtam; ex epistola ad Galatas eum Antiochiae aliquamdiu vixisse atque vivendi sua ratione etiam Iudaeochristianos a Lege liberatos esse demonstrasse ; ex priore ad Corinthios eum varias expeditiones apostolicas suscepisse 8.
1. Simon vel Symeon (Act. 15,14 sine var. lect. in gr. codd., 2 Petr. l(1N AKL P eto) pyov (exauditio Gen. 29,33). Nomen patris aut Jonas "Iova (Matth. 16,17) aut "Iosvze vel ?Iovvzg (Ioan. 21,15) legitur; Ioan. 1,43 codd. graeci alii "Iovà, alii "Imdvou vel "loávvov; unde prius nomen non esse nisi alterius corruptionem nec quidquam cum nomine prophetae Ionae habere commune elucet. — Cír. Ioan. 1,45; Matth. 8,14 et Marc. 1,29; Matth. 4,18 et Marc. 1,16 etc.
213. — Quae Patres nobis de S. Petri ultimis annis tradiderunt, nec valde multa sunt nec omnia eadem certitudine gaudent. Pro certo cum plerisque catholicis interpretibus et historicis tenemus S. Petrum a. 42. Romam venisse romanamque ecclesiam fundasse; in eadem quoque Urbe eum, postquam per viginti quinque annos eius cathedram sacerdotalem tenuit, a. 67. eodem, quo S. Paulum, die vitam martyrio coronasse!. Neque tamen ita Romae consedisse Apostolorum principem dicimus, ut novis itineribus apostolicis Evangelium aliis in terris propagare omiserit; bis saltem illo temporis spatio eum lerosolymis fuisse (a. &&. et 51.) testatur S. Lucas, aliquamdiu eum Antiochiae commoratum esse refert S. Paulus; S. Dionystus Cor., cui non obscure suffragatur S. Clemens Rom., eum Corinthi fuisse et docuisse testis est?; multa alia itinera eum suscepisse, quorum memoria ad nos non pervenit, iure concludimus ex illis, quae S. Paulus de eius laboribus insinuat?. Eum in Pontum quoque, Galatiam, Cappadociam, Asiam, et Bithyniam, quorum provinciarum incolis suas epistolas scripsit, expeditionem apostolicam instituisse, post Origenem aliqui veteres tradiderunt; Babylone vero in Mesopotamia eum consedisse indeque priores suas literas dedisse, post Cosmam Indicopleusten moderni quam plurimi docent protestantici interpretes cum paucis catholicis. Quas duas quaestiones, quum nostras epistolas propius attingant, omittere nobis non licet.
Atque de priore quidem certam traditionem non habemus. Primus enim testis Origenes de itinere S. Petri in Asiae Min. provinciis non nisi ex coniectura quadam loquitur : « Petrus, inquiens, per Pontum, Galatiam, Bithyniam , Cappadociam atque Asiam Iudaeis, qui in dispersione erant, praedicasse videtur » (£oxev); ex epistolae prioris inscriptione eum ad iter illud concludere verba manifestant. Eodem modo Eusebius in antiquorum Patrum operibus de illo nihil invenerat, sed « quibus in provinciis, inquit, Petrus Iudaeis Christum praedicans Novi Foederis doctrinam tradiderit, satis aperte colligitur ex ea epistola, quae ab omnibus sine controversia recipitur » *. Absolute quidem affirmant S. Epiphanius Petrum Pontum et Bithyniam saepenumero peragrasse, et S. Hieronymus Petrum « post praedicationem dispersionis eorum , qui de circumcisione crediderant, in Ponto, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia ac Bithynia » Romam venisse?; at verba ipsa, quibus utuntur, se haec non alio ex fonte, quam ex epistolae inscriptione, hausisse produnt. Quocirca eorum assertiones, etsi sint absolutae, rem nequaquam definiunt. Accedit autem, quod S. Petrus lectores suos interdum ita alloquatur, ut eos non ab ipso, sed ab aliis praedicatoribus, Evangelium accepisse supponat$. Licet igitur Petrum aliquando Asiae Min. regiones aliquas peragrasse negare nolimus, longe probabiliorem tamen eorum habemus sententiam , qui eum in Occidente potius quam in Oriente Evangelium propagasse tenent; atque ecclesiis illis non ideo eum scripsisse, quia utpote ab ipso fundatae singulari eius curae essent commissae, pro certo asserimus.
?. $. Dionys. Cor. apud Eus. H. E. II. 25 (M. 20,209) : « Ita et vos (Romani) admonitione vestra sementem, quae Petri et Pauli satione sucereverat, Romanos sc. et Corinthios, simul commiscuistis. Etenim in nostram Corinthum ingressi nos instituerunt, et simul in Italiam profecti, quum vos docuissent, eodem tempore martyrium pertulerunt ». $. Clem. Rom. 1 Cor. 4T.
Gravior altera est quaestio, num Babylone in Mesopotamia princeps Apostolorum consederit, quando priores suas literas neoph ytis Asiae Min. conscribebat?. Quae sententia a plurimis hodie interpretibus protestanticis magno cum ardore propugnata in verbis Apostoli, quibus salutationes ecclesiae babylonensis transmittit (&embierat 5po d iv Batoow cwvexAexvá) solidum fundamentum et invictum argumentum videtur habere. At nudis istis verbis nihil effici nec rem definiri praeter catholicos interpretes, qui illis non obstantibus unanimi fere consensu Romae epistolam scriptam esse asserunt, etiam nonnulli ex praecipuis protestantibus , qui hac in re nobiscum sentiunt, rectissime censent. (Quaestio enim est, utrum proprio an metaphorico sensu S. Petrus nomen Babylonis adhibuerit. Namque eodem Babylonis nomine Romam in Apocalypsi designari ad unum omnes concedunt, atque inter Iudaeos hanc metaphoram usitatissimam fuisse in comperto est. « Iudaeis, inquit Schoettgen , sollemne erat Romam Babylonem vocare, quia eodem modo, quo Babylonii Iudaeos sub templo primo vexarant et tandem totam regionem cum templo devastarant, Romani fecerant sub templo secundo, usque dum tandem devastatio illius subsecuta est »5. Neque vero vexationum dumtaxat causa Romam Babylonem vocare potuerunt, sed multo magis ob nefandam idololatriam, qua illo tempore omnia omnium gentium subiectarum idola Roma adorabat, effrenatamque morum licentiam, qua effecit, ut quidquid Prophetae de Babylone dixerant de ipsa apte explicaretur. Tota igitur quaestio in eo est, metaphoricone hoc sensu nomen Babylonis in epistola S. Petri sit usurpatum. Quod affirmare non dubitamus his argumentis innixi.
1. Solam hanc explicationem ab antiquissimis temporibus cognovit Ecclesia, usque dum 16. saeculo post Erasmum, qui primus eam in dubium vocavit, Protestantes, ut facilius romanum Petri episcopatum impugnarent, Babylonem proprio sensu intelligere coeperunt paucosque Catholicos secum consentientes invenerunt. Primus enim nostrae interpretationis testis est vir apostolicae aetatis, S. Papias loannis Apostoli discipulus; frustra autem Erasmus ad Eusebium provocat, ut eius testimonium nullius valoris esse demonstret. Quidquid enim de Eusebii sententia relate ad S. Papiae auctoritatem statuitur?, hanc eius explicationem Eusebius non tantum ipse recipit, sed Clementis Alex. quoque idem testantis auctoritate confirmat!0, Quos secuti sunt ex Latinis S. Hieronymus et Ven. Beda, ex Graecis Theophylactus , Oecumenius , Catenae graecae in epp. cath. auctor, i. e. omnes qui quaestionem nostram tractaverunt!!, Neve Cosmam Indicopl. aliter sensisse obiiciatur!?*; testimonium enim eius, si in rebus theologicis alicuius foret auctoritatis (nulla autem ei attribui solet), in hac tamen re sine ullo scrupulo spernere liceret, siquidem leviter tantum et obiter eam attingit nec data opera exagitat. Quam concordes autem eidem sententiae iuniores interpretes inhaeserint, Lorinus et Natalis Alex. testantur, qui uterque nullum catholicum interpretem , qui aliter senserit, se vidisse asserunt; atque usque ad nostram aetatem vix quatuor vel quinque catholici reperientur, qui Babylone Romam designari negarunt!3. Iam vero admirabilis hic per octodecim saecula consensus nullo modo explicatur, nisi explicationem nostram certae traditioni inniti dicamus. lllam enim a Catholicis ad Petri episcopatum romanum defendendum excogitatam esse, non nisi absurdissime assereretur; nam usque ad saec. 16. nemo unquam de romana sede a Petro fundata dubitavit, et hodie nobis tot alia, quibus demonstratur, solida argumenta suppetunt, ut fictis non indigeamus.
2. Neque minus certum est nostram sententiam solam cum primitivae Ecclesiae historia consentire. Etenim si Petrus Babylone in Mesopotamia consedit ibique Evangelium propagavit et ecclesiam fundavit , quomodo factum est, ut ante saec. 3. nullus Babylonis episcopus innotuerit, nulla ecclesiae huius a Petro fundatae mentio ante Cosmam Indicopl. saec. 6. inveniatur, nullum neque in genuinis Patrum vel haereticorum scriptis neque in apocryphis Actibus testimonium eius habeatur? Quid quod ipsae ecclesiae Mesopotamiae, licet fundatores suos inter Apostolos vel apostolicos viros quaerant, de Petro prorsus sileant? Negativum quidem hoc est argumentum, positivo autem aequivalet, quoniam traditio de babylonica Petri sede, si unquam exstitisset, interire non potuisset, quia tam firmum in ipsa nostra epistola argumentum habuisset. Adde quod Christi tempore Babylon teste Strabone o2Óiv & p 7ti/0c, teste Plinio non nisi so/£ztudo esset!*. Quam difficultatem ut effugerent, in maiorem sese iniicientes nonnulli adversarii pro vetere Babylone ad Euphratem sita novam Babylonem, i. e. Seleuciam ad Tigridem, imo Babylonem quandam in Aegypto, quae non erat nisi statio militaris, substituerunt; recentissimi autem, quibus hae explicationes nimis ridiculae sunt visae, pro civitate Babylone Babyloniam, i. e. integram regionem, substituunt; id quod quam parum apte fiat, explicatione non indiget!», Neque illud omittamus una cum salutationibus 746 £v Ba6vXGw cuvexXex t etiam Marc: salutationes a Petro transmitti ; atqui Petrum cum Marco Romae adfuisse tanta testium nube confirmatur, ut prudenti hac de re nulla remaneat dubitatio, de Marci autem itinere babylonico in tota antiquitate ne levissimum quidem invenies vestigium. Imo ex paulinis epistolis Marcum saltem brevi ante illud tempus, quo epistolam scriptam esse plerique tenent, Romae adfuisse constat !ó; quo igitur cum iure eum paucis mensibus postea cum Petro in Mesopotamia fuisse asseritur?
3. Demum inanitate argumentorum , quibus adversarii suam sententiam stabilire conantur, nostra non parum corroboratur. Etsi enim , inquiunt, in Apocalypsi, libro prophetico, qui poetico stylo conscriptus est, Babylonis nomine Roma designetur, in prosaico tamen et humili stylo epistolae nostrae metaphora eiusmodi non recte admittitur; praeterea in inscriptione provinciae eo ordine enumerantur, quo ex Babylone Mesopotamiae venienti singulae occurrunt : « ex Babylonis (non vero ex Romae) prospectu sequitur series regionum ». Mirum est, quod alteram hanc rationem, quaesi a mediae aetatis interprete esset prolata, & modernis protestanticis interpretibus certissime irrideretur, hodie adhuc, quia a protestantico interprete saeculi praecedentis inventa est, non pauci in medium afferant, ac si nunquam tabulam Asiae citerioris inspexissent!?. Inter omnes enim Asiae provincias Pontus, quae prima nominatur, a Babylone erat fere remotissima , nec ulla ex Mesopotamia in Pontum eo tempore patebat via , nisi per Cappadociam, quae tertio loco nominatur, quemadmodum ne hodie quidem alia patet, nisi quis altissimos et difficillimos Armeniae montes transcendere velit. Quo autem ordine provincias S. Petrus enumeraverit , difficillime definitur; illud solum certum est ad earum situm geographicum eum non attendisse. Neque magis valet prior ratio. In epistolari quidem stylo minus frequentes adhibentur tropi, quam in prophetico et poetico; attamen num ideo nullus admittendus est? Annon in ipsa inscriptione tropo usus est S. Petrus, qui epistolam inscripsit ixAXexrote wapexiditkot; Ouxamopág Ilóvcou x71? Annon in nostro ipso versu, quum termino ecclesiae suppresso scriberet : àozzLe: ope 4 ouvexAexv iterum tropum adhibuit!8? Infra ostendemus, epistolam nostram tempore persecutionis neronianae conscriptam esse; facile igitur explicatur, cur Apostolus locum, in quo tum temporis residebat, non nisi subobscure indicare volens tropum istum adhibuerit; per Silvanum autem, qui eam ecclesiis attulit, omne dubium, quod de loco scriptionis forte remanebat, facillime potuit removeri.
214. — 1l. QuiBUSNAM DESTINATA SIT 1 PErRI, sola inscriptione docemur, quae tamen tam clara non est, ut varias sententias excludat. Inscribitur enim « electis advenis dispersionis (bxXexsoig mapemiduos Qiaenopac) Ponti, Galatiae, Cappadociae, Asiae et Bithyniae ». Apostolorum principem illis provinciis Evangelium non attulisse supra iam diximus; S. Paulum vero ecclesias Galatiae et Asiae fundasse constat atque summa cum veri similitudine asserimus in Ponto quoque , Cappadocia et Bithynia Evangelium a S. Paulo eiusque discipulis esse propagatum. Inter quos Silvanus fuit, qui S. Pauli in secundo itinere apostolico socius cum eo Phrygiam, Galatiam aliasque Asiae Min. provincias peragravit!; Silvanus autem, postquam cum magistro suo primas ecclesias in Macedonia et Achaia fundavit, nec in Actibus nec in epistolis paulinis amplius commemoratur, atque probabile esse diximus per eum epistolam suam Paulum Galatis transmisisse simulque eum ecclesiis Asiae Min. eodem modo praeposuisse, quo postea cretensibus Titum et. asiaticis Timotheum praeposuit?. Revera in nostra epistola, quae ecclesiis Asiae Min. destinata est, Silvanum cum Petro invenimus; eius enim ope epistola transmittitur, atque Petrum de statu ecclesiarum illarum per eundem certiorem esse redditum iure supponimus.
Iam vero ecclesiae Galatiae et Asiae ex ludaeis et ethnicis conversis ita coaluerant, ut Ethnicochristiani multum praevalerent; idem in ecclesiis Ponti, Cappadociae et Bithyniae obtinuisse non tantum probabile fit, si circumstantias omnes perpenderimus, sed etiam ex epistola ipsa non obscure eruitur. Utrum enim ludaeochristianis an ethnicis conversis destinata fuerit, antiqua est controversia, quae optime dirimitur, Si cum multis interpretibus eam ecclesiis, quas mixtas vocavimus, scriptam dicemus.
Etenim Casstodorus , Iunilius aliique antiqui Latini , qui Petri epistolis titulum « ad Gentes » praefixerunt , non tantum cum S. Augustino, qui contra Faustum Manich. Apostolum ethnicis conversis scripsisse contendit, ad 1 Petr. 2, 9. 10. rectissime provocare possunt?, sed alios quoque textus (1 Petr. 1, 1&. 18; 3, 6; 4, 3) habent, quibus suam inscriptionem defendant. Neque altera ex parte Origenz, Eusebio, Didymo Alez., Ps. Athanasio aliisque graecis interpretibus, quibuscum consentit S. Hieronymus, si Petrum neophytis iudaicis epistolas suas destinasse censent*, aut Ven. Bedae siillis proxime, « qui de gentilitate ad agnitionem et susceptionem divinae Legis atque perceptis sacramentis legalibus ad acceptionem gratiae fidei pervenire meruerunt »?, i. e. proselytis iudaicis conversis, eas scriptas esse asserit, validissimum deest argumentum : tam frequens enim in utraque cpistola petrina est Veteris T. usus, ut neophyti ethnici, qui recenter fidem acceperant, eas plene vix intellexerint. Idem igitur in nostris obtinet, quod in plerisque paulinis, quae etiam una cum textibus, qui proxime Iudaeos conversos respiciunt , alios plurimos exhibent, qui neophytos olim ethnicos fuisse supponunt; quocirca petrinas, quemadmodum paulinas, ecclesiis mixlis scriptas dicamus oportet. Quod si quis vero ex inscriptione « advenis dispersionis » (rape, uxemopác) deduceret, solis Iudaeochristianis , utpote in aliena terra dispersis , epistolam scribi , is certissime erraret; « electi advenae dispersionis » enim omnes intelliguntur Christiani inter ethnicos dispersi, qui in hac terra peregrinantes (1,17) peregrini vel advenae vocantur; siquidem epistola integra in eo fere est, ut hac in terra nos permanentem civitatem non habere sed ad meliorem patriam tendere ostendat (2, 11; 1, 4 sqq. etc); recte igitur ipsi graeci interpretes, qui solis Iudaeis epistolam destinatam dicebant, tropicum tamen hunc vocabuli sensum retinuerunt 9.
215. — III. DE TEMPORE, QUO SCRIPTA SIT Í. PkTRI, disputaturi pro certo supponimus, quod iam demonstravimus, illis ecclesiis eam esse destinatam, quas S. Paulus eiusque socii in Asiae Min. provinciis fundaverant. Quapropter omnes illas opiniones reiicimus, quae eius originem ante Pauli tertium iter apostolicum finitum (i. e. ante a. 59.) ponunt!; Gentium enim Apostolus, etsi in duobus prioribus iam itineribusin provincia Galatiae ecclesias fundasset, in reliqua tamen Asia Min. Evangelium latius non propagavit, nisi quum in tertia expeditione « perambularet ex ordine galaticam regionem et Phrygiam » atque « peragratis superioribus partibus » Asiae citerioris Ephesum venisset ibique per triennium residens tanto cum fructu laborasset, « ut omnes, qui habitabant in Asia, audirent verbum Domini, Iudaei atque gentiles »?.
At neque immediate post Pauli tertium iter epistola nostra scripta est ; ecclesiae enim, quibus S. Petrus scribit, aliquamdiu iam exstiterant atque eo tempore, quo scribit, ob religionem suam tantam ab ethnicis persecutionem aut perferebant aut saltem timebant?, ut consolatione et exhortatione indigerent. Quam persecutionem fuisse illam ipsam opinamur, in qua a. 64. Nero, ut « iussi incendii » Urbis rumorem aboleret omnemque a semet averteret suspicionem, « quaesitissimis poenis affecit eos, quos per flagitia invisos vulgus CAristianos appellabat » et « afflicti suppliciis sunt Christiani, genus hominum superstitionis novae et malefíicae »*. Etenim profecto non semel neophytos monet Apostolus, ut persecutorum detractiones calumniasque, qui de ipsis « tamquam de malefactoribus detrectent » , bonis suis operibus sanctaque sua vita confundant, neve pati « tamquam Cristian? erubescant, sed Deum in isto nomine glorificent »5. Es eo quidem, quod Tacitus et Suetonius iisdem, quibus epistola nostra, locutionibus crimina Christianis obiecta designarint, firmum argumentum procul dubio desumere non licet; at persecutionem, quam Apostolus commemorat, universalem fuisse monemus neque subita quadam plebis exacerbatione provocatam sed a magistratibus motam et rectam; eiusmodi autem publicam et universalem Christianorum persecutionem ante neronianam non esse excitatam constat. Neronem quoque, si profanis scriptoribus omnimoda fides esset adhibenda, solos Christianos illos, qui in Urbe degebant, persecutum esse, fatendum esset; at Taciti Suetoniique silentio disertum Orosii testimonium opponere licet?. Si quis vero illud, utpote iunioris scriptoris, reiicere velit, ad totam temporis illius rationem provocamus; qui enim fieri potuit, ut persecutionem ab imperatore in Urbe excitatam magistratus adulatores et assentatores in provinciis non imitarentur, praesertim quum ubique terrarum nomen Christianum eo tempore ethnicis et ludaeis esset odiosum? Immo in Asia Min. persecutionem cruentam nondum exarsissee neque suppliciis et morte Christianos ibi jam esse punitos concedamus : num crudelissima persecutione in Urbe saeviente in provinciis Christiani non erant praemuniendi atque ad vigilantiam exhortandi, quia adversarius eorum tamquam leo rugiens jam circuibat quaerens quem devoraret? Exeunte igitur a. 65., postquam Romae « quaesitissimis poenis » affecti erant Christiani atque in provinciis ethnicorum animi contra eosdem excitari iam inceperant, Silvanum Romam venisse censemus, ut cum Paulo, quem vinculis liberatum esse forte nondum audiverat, de ecclesiarum sibi commissarum s(atu conferret; Paulus autem paucis mensibus antea ex carcere dimissus in Hispaniam erat profectus, quare illo absente Petrus ecclesias illas epistola sua confortare et consolari voluit.
Ante a. 64. finem vel insequentis initium epistolam nostram non esse scriptam affinitate confirmatur, quam inter illam interque paulinas nonnullas, maxime illam ad Ephes., aliquatenus etiam alias ad Coloss. et Rom. intercedere, moderni interpretes plerique docent. Illis quidem non assentimur, qui integram fere Petri epistolam ex laciniis paulinis consutam esse volunt?. Quis enim crediderit scriptorem quemcunque, nedum inspiratum, ea qua illi interpretes volunt ratione textus paulinos varios conquisivisse atque disiecta membra in novum corpus conglutinasse? Num ita exorta esset epistola, quam ipse Erasmus « perfecte dignam Apostolorum principe, plenam auctoritatis et maiestatis apostolicae, verbis parcam sententiis disertam » esse iudicavit quamque alius criticus non minus severus, Grotius « «9 egodpv conveniens ingenio principis Apostolorum » habere dixit? Si ex paulinis locis et vocabulis Petrus suam epistolam contexuit, quomodo factum est, ut in brevissimo hoc scripto circiter sexaginta 4za& Aeyópeva, quibus nec Paulus nec alius N. T. scriptor usus est, legantur? Revera affinitates, quas illi interpretes invenisse sibi videntur, aliae ex usu vocabulorum exoriuntur, quae apostolicus scriptor, si ideas suas exprimere voluit, evitare non potuit (nícci; , Omnis , Go, 7 29109 etc), aliae longissime sunt quaesitae, quum eadem vocabula in diverso prorsus contextu et diversa significatione adhibeantur, aut ideae similes aliis omnino vocabulis exprimantur. Nihilominus affinitatem quandam adesse non diffitemur, immo asserimus?, atque ex ea concludimus epistolam nostram post illam ad Ephesios esse conscriptam. Etenim in altera sua epistola S. Petrus se fratris sui Pauli epistolas legisse diserte testatur; inter Novi T. autem scriptores alius non est, qui Petro frequentius aut Veteris T. locos alleget aut verba ex V. T. desumta ad suas exprimendas ideas adhibeat; nihil igitur absoni aut miri habet, quod simili ratione etiam verbis paulinis, quae in memoria retinuerat, ad suos sensus exprimendos utatur. Epistolam vero ad Ephesios exeunte a. 63. scriptam esse ostendimus (161); nostram igitur ante a. 64. scriptam non esse iure asserimus !0.
6. 1 Petr. 5,9 (:i06zeq và a0 và vv raünuázov x5 Ev 1 xóop o Ou v d0sY o ótntt intreAeto0at) ; 3,15 (parati semper ad satisfactionem omni poscenti vos rationem de ea quae in vobis est spe).
9. Revera 1 Petr. 3,22 est summa quaedam eorum, quae leguntur Eph. 1,20. 21.
("1naoó XpwroU) 8x iavv 2v BsEia Ocod, (Beox) iyefoae abrov (Xptsrov) ix vixcw xat ropuücl, tl; oüpavov Üxotayévtuov aj:p — zablaag 0v ós&tG abro0 lv roi; obpavotg évy£.ov xoi ££ouatóv xai uvdusov. Üzspávo rácn Hbovalag xai Suváptos
Gratiarum actionem eodem modo incipiunt 1 Petr. 1,3 et Eph. 1,3 (ctr. 2 Cor. 1,3 ubi similis habetur) : « Benedictus Deus et Pater D. N. Iesu Christi, qui » etc; monita nonnulla ad amussim fere consonant :
1 Petr. 3,1. Ab quuatec, Urotaoaóusvat voi; — Eph. 5,22. Al vuvaixt;, toi, (iot, dvópá- lóiot; dvózxstv xrX. 9,18. Ot olxfrat üzorac- — Gtv ürordoctoüe. 6,4. Oi GoUÀot, Óxaxoürre Góutvot iv. rzavtl oó6t toi; O:ozózatg x1. ToU, xoplotg xarà odoxa jutzà oó$02 x1À.
Petrum paulinas epistolas eo, quem nos quoque admittimus, modo adhibuisse inter catholicos interpretes admittunt Hug (Einl. II. p. 540 sqq.), A. Maier (Einl. p. 410), Reithmayr (Einl. p. 735), Valroger (Introd. II. p. 380), Bacuez (Man. bibl. IV. p. 480), Bisping (Exeg. Handb. VIII. p. 98). — Drach (Épitres cath. p. 71 sq.) non satis accurate loquitur de « ressemblances voulues et de reproductions recherchées » « dues à un dessein prémédité de faire allusion à des passages d'épitres déjà connues »; quomodo enim haec assertio demonstretur, non videmus. Hundhausen (1. c. I. p. 102 sq.) dubitat, num usus qualiscunque paulinarum sit admittendus. Aliqui praeter paulinas etiam lacobi epistolam cognitam fuisse Petro putant (1 Petr. 5,5. 6 et Iac. 4,6. T. 10; 1 Petr. 1,6. 7 et Iac. 1,2. 3; 1 Petr. 2,1 et Iac. 1,21 etc), at longius quaesitas censemus istas assimilationes.
216. — IV. D& FINE ET ARGUMENTO 1. PETRI. Apostolus finem suum his verbis ipse indicat : « vobis breviter scripsi obsecrans (vel potius exhortans m«9ax«Xóv) et obtestans hanc esse veram gratiam Dei, in qua statis » (5,19). Ne neophyti gravissimis in periculis constituti ethnicorum calumniis et persecutionibus a vera fide abstrahi se sinerent, quam maxime erat timendum; quapropter edocendi erant religionem, quam Apostoli Gentium ministerio acceperant, veram et divinam esse, etsi eius professione persecutionem hanc sibi attraxissent. At simul erant exhortandi, ut non tantum spretis periculis firmi constantesque fidei &cceptae inhaererent, sed etiam moribus suis vere christianis calumnias ethnicorum confunderent omniaque sua officia erga superiores et erga aequales, sive ethnicos sive christianos, rite implerent haereditatis coelestis memores eiusque spe viva confortati. Duplicem vero hunc finem non eo modo, quem S. Paulus fere tenere solet, prosequitur, ut in dogmatica quadam parte doctrinam eorum non obstantibus persecutionibus, quas provocavit, veram et divinam esse ostendat, in altera autem conclusiones practicas deducat moresque corrigat, sed integra epistola exhortationibus constat, argumenta autem , quibus religionem christianam esse veram gratiam Dei demonstrat, aptis in locis inserit !.
Quamobrem divisionem accuratam epistolae nostrae tradere admodum est difficile; satis apte tamen in tres quasi classes exhortationes distribuemus?; nam aliae generaliori modo integram vitam christianam respiciunt (1,13-2,10), aliae autem, in quibus Apostolus ad ethnicos, inter quos Christiani vivunt, periculaque, in quibus versantur animum advertit, singulorum officia diligentius explicant (2,11-4,19), aliae demum de oeconomia ecclesiastica agunt (5,1-11). Idearum nexum in analysi evolvere conabimur.
1. inscriptionem (1,1. 2.), in qua praerogativas Christianorum iam insinuat,
3. gratiarum actionem (1,3- 13), quae beneficia Christianis per Evangelium allata commendat.
à.) Namque regenerati sunt in haereditatem coelestem, quae illis certa est, quum Deus illos per fidem sit custoditurus (1,3-5); quapropter etsi nunc calamitatibus probentur, gaudebunt tamen adveniente Christo et salutem perfectam afferente (1,6 -9); b.) quanta autem haec salus sit, ex eo elucet, quod prophetae avide illam desideraverint et perscrutati sint, atque Angeli ipsi accuratius illam cognoscere cupiant (1,10- 13).
1. Quo exhortationum fundamento posito in PRIMA PARTE (1,13- 2,10) ad vitam vere christianam agendam generali modo eos exhortatur.
1. Etenim quia tanta salus eis parata est, repleti sint oportet spe viva, qua impellantur, ut ei, qui ipsos ad salutem vocaverit , vita sancta assimilentur (1,13- 16). Quam exhortationem efficaciorem reddit monens a.) eos patrem habere, qui simul est iudex iustus (4,17), b.) eosque pretioso sanguine Christi esse redemtos atque per Christum eos fidem accepisse (1,18 - 21).
2. Cum hac spe coniungant oportet veram caritatem fraternam (1,92; fratres enim facti sunt secunda illa generatione ex semine incorruptibili i. e. ex verbo Dei, quod in aeternum manet (1,23-25), ac proin deponant oportet , quidquid verae caritati opponitur (3,1).
3. Quibus depositis renati velut infantes lac verae doctrinae concupiscant oportet, qua crescant et confortentur, ut tamquam lapides vivi vero lapidi angulari superaedificari cum eoque intime uniti vera sacrificia spiritualia offerre possint (2,2- 5). Qua doctrina Scripturae (Is. 28,16) testimonio confirmata (2,6-8) eorum dignitatem commendat, qui Christo superaedificati verum Dei populum constituunt (2, 9. 40).
III. In ALTERA PARTE (2,14 - 4,19) post generalem regulam stabilitam, ut nimirum inter ethnicos degentes bonis suis moribus eorum calumnias confundant eosque ad gloriam vero Deo dandam adducant (2, 44. 12), transit ad monita specialia; atque
1. quidem docet quomodo, utpote ?nter ethnicos degentes, gerere se debeant (8,13 -3,12).
8.) Omnes subiecti sint superioribus, quia haec est voluntas Dei , ut hac ratione ad silentium redigant calumniatores (2,13 - 17); b.)servi quoque subditi sint dominis etiam dyscolis (2,18); si enim iniuste patientur, Christo similes fiunt, qui, etsi innocentissimus esset, propter nostra peccata passus est nosque sanguine suo redemit (2.19 - 23); c.) mulieres subditae sint maritis , ut eos, si forte nondum conversi sint, conversatione sua bona ad fidem attrahant (3, 4. 2); neve corpus vestibus pretiosis, sed cor virtutibus exornent Saram imitatae, cuius filiae factae sint (3,3-6); d.) viri vicissim uxores suas utpote cohaeredes gratiae coelestis honorent (3,7); e.) omnes demum veram caritatem exerceant, neve unquam malum malo rependant, sed e contra omnibus benedicant, ut ipsi quoque benedictionem aeternam consequantur (3,8-9); quam doctrinam Scripturae (Ps. 33, 13 sqq.) testimonio confirmat (3,10- 12).
2. Secundo loco, quomodo ín praesenti persecutione sese gerere debeant, explicat (3,43 - 4,44).
a.) Praeprimis bonam conscientiam habere studeant, atque sine ullo timore coram magistratibus rationem spei suae ita reddant, ut calumniatores moribus suis confundant (2,13-16); melius enim est eos innocentes, quam reos, pati assimilatos Christo, qui iustus pro iniustis moriens et sibi et nobis et iis, qui poenitentes in diluvii aquis perierunt, bona ingentia meruit (3,17 - 22).
b.) Christo autem mortuo assimilati ipsi quoque mortui sint peccatis, in quibus ante vocationem suam vixerant (4, 1. 2); neve ethnicorum increpationibus atque blasphemiis ad pristinam vitam sese retrahi sinant (4, 3. 4); ethnici enim de his iusto iudici rationem reddere tenebuntur (4, 5. 6).
Ad quod iudicium instans animos advertentes Christiani ipsi vigilent, precentur, omnimodam virtutem, maxime caritatem, exerceant (4,7 -11).
c.) Nolint mirari, quod haec persecutio super eos venerit, sed potius de illa gaudeant , quippe qua participes fiant passionum Christi (4,12- 14); caveant igitur, ne rei patiantur, sed neve erubescant, si pro nomine christiano pati debeant (4, 13. 16); iam enim instare iudicium, in quo propter persecutiones, quas patiuntur, vitam aeternam sint obtenturi (4,16 - 19).
IV. In TERTIA PARTE (5,1-11) habentur monita quaedam specialissima ,
1. ad presbyteros, ut gregem suum sollicite pascant vitaeque exemplo ei praeluceant (5,1 -3); quod si faciant, a principe pastorum immarcescibilem coronam percipient (5,4);
8.) ut omnes veram exerceant humilitatem sese humiliantes sub potenti manu Dei, qui eos exaltabit in tempore opportuno (3,5 - 7); b.)ut sobrii sint ac vigilent, quo resistere possint diabolo eos perdere volenti, sese consolentur cogitatione, fratres eorum eadem persecutione premi, Deum autem, qui eos vocavit, in persecutione etiam eos esse confirmaturos (9,8 - 11).
V. In brevissimo EPILoco (2,12 - 14) scopum epistolae huius, quam per Silvanum eis transmittit, clare indicat, salutationes aliquas addit, apostolicamque benedictionem eis impertit.
918. — VI. AuTuENTIAE 1. PETRI tot antiquitatis habemus documenta, ut quomodo hoc nostro saeculo rationalistae quidam eam in dubium vocaverint atque negaverint, vix intelligatur. Euseb?us enim eam inter *& óp.oXoyoóp.eva enumerat, idque iure merito, quandoquidem inde ab ipso tempore apostolico luculentissima et continua testimonia eam in Ecclesia agnitam esse demonstrant. Allusionibus illis magis minusve dubiis, quae ex SS. Clementis Rom. et Ignatii M. genuinis epistolis afferri solent!, non indigemus, siquidem duorum aliorum virorum apostolicorum testimonia cer/a nobis sunt conservata, qui vel eam solam ob causam testes sunt maximae auctoritatis, quoniam sedes episcopales in illis provinciis, quibus nostra epistola inscribitur, tenuerunt : Eusebio scilicet teste S. Papias « testimoniis ex priore Petri epistola desumtis usus est », et S. Polycarpus M. « in illa, quae etiamnunc exstat ad Philippenses epistola, testimonia nonnulla ex priore Petri epistola desumsit »; revera in brevissima Polycarpi epistola octo textus petrini fere ad verbum adhibentur?. Quibus duos haereticos, qui eadem fere aetate vixerunt, adiungamus : teste enim Clemente Alex. Basilides e& Valentini discipulus 7Aeodotus Byz. nostram epistolam genuinam habuerunt et pro auctoritate allegzaverunt?. Omittimus iterum S. Iustinum et auctorem epistolae ecclesiae Vzenn., qui ad eam dumtaxat alludunt *, ut illos exeuntis 2. et ineuntis 3. saec. Patres nomineinus, qui disertis verbis eam S. Petro auctori attribuunt. In versione
Peschito eam semper sub Petri nomine adfuisse omnes concedunt : praeterea in Oriente habemus S. Firmilianum , Caesareae in Cappadocia, i. e. una ex provinciis, quibus scripta est epistola nostra, episcopum, et magnos alexandrinae ecclesiae doctores, Clementem et Origenem5, et in Occidente S. Irenaeum , Tertullianum , S. Cyprianum, qui sine ullius dubitationis expressione et non semel sed frequenter eam Petri nomine addito pro divina auctoritate allegant. Mirum forsitan nonnemini videatur, quod fragmentum Muratorianum , canon igitur ecclesiae romanae, eam non recenseat, attamen verba, quae de S. Pctri scriptis agunt, librariorum negligentia vel interpretis ignorantia ita sunt corrupta, ut quid auctor de illis dicere voluerit prorsus ignoretur; monuimus quoque fragmentum, quum acephalum sit, eodem modo, quo 1. loannis epistolam, quae ab omnibus recipiebatur, una cum quarto Evangelio posuit, etiam cum secundo Evangelio, cuius praecipuum auctorem Petrum fuisse tofa antiquitas testatur, priorem Petri epistolam forte coniunxisse?. Ceterum ex S. Clementis Rom. et S. Hermae allusionibus eam ab Ecclesia romana fuisse agnitam satis constat 8.
Quibus externis testimoniis permoti usque ad saeculi nostri initium omnes, qui christiano nomine gloriabantur, epistolam hanc principi Apostolorum auctori attribuerunt et pro divina auctoritate adhibuerunt; etenim Theodorum Mopsuest. eam cum aliis catholicis reiecisse non satis recte ex Leontii Byz. verbis colligi videtur; certe Nestoriani, qui Theodori canonem retinuerunt, hodie adhuc eam inter suas Scripturas sacras habent ?. At nostra aetate a criticae scholae interpretibus magna cum vi impugnata est eius authentia. Omnibus facem praetulit H. H. Cludius, qui nimiam eius cum paulinis affinitatem esse ratus eam a discipulo quodam Pauli scriptam proclamavit !?. Quod quam maxime placuit Neotubingianis, qui pro more suo eam ad Paulinos et Petrinos uniendos compositam demonstrare voluerunt; at irriti fuerunt eorum conatus, nec inter reliquos «criticos» quisquam illis assentiebatur, quamquam ipsi quoque iunioris originis epistolam esse declararunt'!. Quodsi vero interpretes illos interrogas, quonam tandem tempore sit scripta, alius respondet tempore Domitiani (a. 95), alii aut in initio aut in fine regni Traiani (98-117), alius tempore Antonini Pii (a. 140)'?. Omnia haec systemata nec accuratiore expositione nec diligenti refutatione indigere per se patet; inter se primum conveniant « critici » atque in propria domo lites suas componant, antequam a nobis postulent , ut arbitrarias eorum fictiones examini subiiciamus. Hoc igitur loco sufficiet, quid de praecipuis eorum argumentis sit sentiendum, paucis verbis explicassc.
Praeprimis nostram epistolam a paulinis dependere monent; atqui Petrum, inquiunt, coapostoli sui scripta adhibere non tantum non decuit, sed inter epistolas adhibitas etiam nonnullae sunt, quae diu post Pauli et Petri mortem exortae ab eo adhiberi non potuerunt '?. Validissimum sane argumentum , si omnia, quae in praemissis asseruntur, vera essent ! S. Petrum paulinas epistolas cognovisse atque adhibuisse ipsi asseruimus, at exaggerandum non esse earum usum diximus; quomodo vero exaggeretur, facile apparet, si tabulas, quibus similitudines inter petrinam et paulinas a rationalistis recensentur, inter se comparaveris ; ne duas quidem invenies, quae in maiore etiam exemplorum parte (nedum integrae) consentiant; vix non vocabula quaecunque a Petro adhibita, si in paulina epistola leguntur, ex illa desumta dicuntur, atque Petrus, ut in rationalistarum iudicio absolveretur, novam sibi linguam fingere debuisset. Alterum , quod asseritur, nonnullas paulinas post Apostolorum mortem conscriptas esse, commentum esse rationalisticum supra demonstravimus
Praeter hoc argumentum, quod illis « decretorium » est!*, alia minora afferuntur : Petrum enim aiunt fuisse « apostolum circumcisionis » ideoque ecclesiis asiaticis, quae ethnicis conversis coaluerant, scribere non potuisse; hierarchiam quoque supponi, quae Petri aetate nondum exstiterit; nullum aptum tempus inveniri, in quo a Petro epistola sit scripta; epistolam ipsam, utpote quae certo fine careat cuique omnis idearum nexus et unitas desit, indignam esse , quae Petro auctori attribuatur 5 etc. Quae omnia, postquam supra de origine, fine, analysi epistolae disseruimus, nova refutatione non indigent. !
219. — VII. Dk OCCASIONE, FINE, ARGUMENTO 2. PETRI EPISTOLAE. Paullo ante mortem suam, quam mox instare divina revelatione scivit, exeunte ergo a. 66. vel ineunte 67., S. Petrus ex Urbe iisdem ecclesiis asiaficis, quibus priorem, hanc alteram quoque epistolam scripsit !. Duobus autem illis annis, qui a priore scripta effluxerant, status rerum illis in ecclesiis mutatus erat. Etenim persecutio illa, ad quam strenue perferendam neophytos erat exhortatus, desaevierat, maius autem Christianis imminebat periculum ab haeretica aliqua secta, quae non vi, sed dolo et ludibriis neophytorum fidem subvertere conabatur ?.
Haeretici illi, quos deu3o9idacxzXoug appellat, S. Pauli ut videtur textibus nonnullis abutentes antinomisticum errorem propagabant, atque Christianos a lege solutos ad luxuriam aliaque vitia, quibus ipsi indulgebant, seducere conabantur?. Quem finem ut facilius attingerent, Christi dignitatem divinamque naturam videntur negasse; nam quin ad eandem sectam, quam Petrus vitandam monet, illi quoque haeretici pertinuerint, quos S. ludas impugnavit, quia « Dei nostri gratiam in luxuriam transferentes solum dominatorem et Dominum N. Iesum Christum negent », non est dubium^*; ulterius autem progressi S. Petri adversarii secundum quoque Christi adventum ludibriis scurrilibus impugnarunt, quapropter etiam épyzaixrat (illusores) ab Apostolo vocantur 5. Difficilior est quaestio, quaenam inter haereticos istos interque adversarios, quos lacobus et loannes impugnant, relatio intercedat. Quantum equidem iudicare possum, in lacobi epistola antinomistici erroris prima habemus vestigia; Pauli doctrina de cessatione Legis male intellecta perversi homines ad pervertendos neophytos abuti quidem coeperant, at totam suam perversitatem nondum manifestaverant, Haeretici quos ludas impugnat, theoreticis illis deductionibus non contenti pravam doctrinam in praxin iam deduxerant atque exemplis suis non minus, quam verbis, fideles seducebant. Ut divini vero iudicii minis, quas eis proposuerat S. Iudas, fideles non terrerentur, secundum Christi adventum et futurum iudicium ludibrio habuerunt haerelici ideoque Petri epistola perstringi merebantur. Ea demum, quae loannes, praesertim in Apocalypsi, de Nicolaitis ecclesias asiaticas vastantibus tradit, ita sunt comparata, ut eosdem nobis haereticos in perversis suis placitis iam obduratos ante oculos ponere videantur. Quocirca in epistolis catholicis et in Apocalypsi unam eandemque haeresin ab eius initiis usque ad adultam eius aetatem describi et impugnari opinamur*. Quidquid autem de hac sententia censeatur, illud negare non licet, eo tempore in Asiae Min. ecclesiis antinomisticos errores esse propagatos neque paucas turbas excitasse, ita quidem ut mirum non sit, quod princeps quoque Apostolorum eos refellere voluerit.
Quomodo $. Petrus asiaticarum ecclesiarum novum periculum resciverit, utrum iterum per Silvanum, per quem epistolam priorem iar transmiserat, an per alium , ignoramus. Pro pastorali autem sua sollicitudine illi occurrere fidelesque contra illud praemunire voluit; quam ob causam, antequam e vita egrederetur, cuius proximum finem Dominus ei revelaverat, nostram epistolam velut testamentum eis relinquere statuit, ne insipientium ore traducti a propria firmitate exciderent, sed potius erescerent in gratia et in cognitione Domini N. et Salvatoris lesu Christi 7.
Occasione autem et fine, quibus ad scribendum adductus est, argumentum quoque epistolae ei erat indicatum. Etenim ut blasphemias, quibus pseudodoctores divinitatem Christi impugnabant, confunderet refelleretque, asserenda quidem divina eius natura erat summaque dignitas : quare etiam statim in inscriptione eum disertis verbis « Deum nostrum et Salvatorem » (iv Suatocóv? 509 €oü ZuGv xci Xotípo; 'Iaso5 Xpwo?) appellat, nec unquam per totam epistolam nomen eius nisi « Domini nostri » titulo addito commemora!?. At praeprimis, ut Christianos in fide retineret et infirmos contra seductorum fraudes praemuniret, una ex parte magna bona, quae per Christum acceperant, firmumque fundamentum, cui eorum fides innitebatur, in memoriam eis erant revocanda, altera autem ex parte non minore cum cura extremum perditionis periculum, cui seductores et seducti erant expositi, ostendendum erat ludibriaque illa refutanda, quibus « illusores » ad labefactandam neophytorum fidem abutebantur. Unde pro duplici argumento duae epistolae partes : in priore (1,3-21) magnitudinem donorum per Christum allatorum firmitatemque fidei nostrae adstruit, in altera (2,1-13) neophytos ab haereticorum doctrinis absterret et contra eorum seductiones praemunit ?.
Cornelius a Lapide
Preface 34 paragraphs
Three things must be premised here in the customary manner: first, concerning the authority and dignity of this Epistle; second, concerning its argument; third, concerning its author.
As to the first. This Epistle is a legitimate work of St. Peter and canonical Scripture, by the confession of all Catholics, and no one has ever doubted it, as Eusebius testifies, lib. V Hist. cap. III; wherefore the councils, Pontiffs and Fathers who compile the catalogue of canonical books place this Epistle in it without hesitation. Jodocus Coccius cites them exactly and at length in Thesaurus Cathol., tom. I, lib. VI, pag. 720.
It was written at Rome (for he calls it Babylon in this manner, cap. v, vers. 13) sent through Silas, or Silvanus, cap. v, vers. 12, in the year, as it appears, 45 from the nativity of Christ: in which year Peter arrived at Rome, and from Antioch transferred the Pontifical See to it. This is evident from the fact that at the end of the Epistle he brings in St. Mark greeting the faithful. But St. Mark departed from Rome sent by St. Peter to Alexandria, in the year of Christ 45, after he had previously written his Gospel at Rome, as I said in the Chronotaxis. This year of Christ 45 was the third of the Emperor Claudius, the tenth of Paul from his conversion.
This Epistle was written before all the Epistles of Paul. So Baronius, who also adds that it appears from St. Jerome that it was written by St. Peter in Hebrew, but converted into Latin by St. Mark; yet St. Jerome only says that St. Peter varied the style: for the style of the second Epistle is different from the style of the first; which is true, even if we say that both were composed by him in the same Latin or Greek language. Interpreters commonly hold that it was written in Greek, inasmuch as it was addressed to Greeks, namely Cappadocians, Asians, Bithynians, Pontians: whence also in doubtful matters they have recourse to the Greek text, as to the original.
Moreover, it was written primarily to Christians from among the Jews converted to Christ, who were dispersed through Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, as is evident from the title of the Epistle and cap. III, vers. 6. So St. Athanasius in the Synopsis; Eusebius, lib. III Histor., cap. IV; St. Jerome, De Script. Eccles., in Peter; Didymus, Oecumenius, Bede, Cajetan and Titelmann here, and it will be made clear cap. I, vers. 4, 8, 9, and epist. II, cap. III, vers. 15 and 16. For these were the first Christians whom St. Peter had converted by preaching a little before; for whom he therefore exercised particular care, as is evident from Galatians. Secondarily, however, and consequently, it was also written to Christians converted from paganism. For St. Peter, as the Shepherd, Bishop, and universal Pontiff of both these and those, was created by Christ, John XXII, 45. Whence cap. II, vers. 10, he confirms and celebrates the vocation of the Gentiles from Hosea, cap. II, vers. 10. The same thing is insinuated cap. I, vers. 18, and cap. IV, vers. 3; epist. II, cap. I, vers. 1. So St. Augustine, lib. XXII Contra Faustum, cap. LXXXIX; St. Thomas, Bede, the Gloss, Lyran here; Ribera in Hosea II, num. 4, and others. St. Boniface, primate Bishop of Mainz and Apostle of Germany, who fell as a martyr in Frisia, so valued the Epistles of St. Peter that he requested them to be written for him in golden letters by Eadburga the Abbess, as is evident from his letter in Baronius, tom. IX, pag. 39. Formerly five books of St. Peter circulated, namely the Acts, the Preaching, the Gospel, the Apocalypse and the Judgment, but of suspect faith and spurious, according to St. Jerome, lib. De Script. Eccles., in Peter, and Rufinus in Expositione Symboli. So also the Itinerary of St. Peter published under the name of St. Clement, Gelasius numbered among the apocrypha cap. Sancta Romana, dist. 15.
As to the second. The argument of the Epistle is twofold. The first pertains to faith, the second to morals. First, he confirms and celebrates the admirable counsel and benefit of God concerning the incarnation of the Word, his passion, redemption, the vocation of Jews and Gentiles to the grace, salvation and eternal glory of Christ. For this is the orthodox doctrine predicted by the Prophets, preached by the Apostles by the command of God, which therefore they ought constantly to follow and retain, and in defending it to endure all things, even death and martyrdom itself, courageously. Wherefore he exhorts all to the tolerance of persecutions following the example of Christ and to constancy in faith.
Second, from faith he passes to morals, and forms them according to the norm and discipline of Christ. He teaches therefore that Christians ought to obey kings, princes and magistrates even if pagan; servants their masters, wives their husbands, young men their elders, the faithful their pastors and teachers, and conversely he teaches what men owe to wives, pastors to their subjects. He exhorts to prudence, vigilance in prayers, mutual charity, hospitality, patience, humility and temperance. But above all others he refreshes and inculcates patience and the example of the suffering Christ, and this in each chapter, because Christians then new, on account of the new religion of Christ, everywhere suffered much from Jews and Gentiles, not only words and reproaches, but also spoils, prisons, stripes, death and martyrdom. It is written with apostolic majesty and spirit, sublime and exultant. For it deeply scrutinizes and admires the goods hidden in Christ and in Christ's cross and redemption, imparted to us from heaven.
Note: The same sentences are found repeatedly among St. Peter, St. Paul, St. James and John; the reason for which is: First, that all the Apostles were moved by the same Holy Spirit, who suggested to them the same truths and sentences, and this for the testimony both of truth and of harmony. Second, that all had the same understanding and precepts concerning Christian virtues: but where the same conception and understanding exists, the same speech and sentence easily follows: for the word of the mouth corresponds to the word of the mind; for from it it is born and produced. Third, that, just as before their separation they published a common Creed of faith, so also it is likely that they used in common speech, equally as in doctrine and sermons, many of the same Christian maxims and axioms, for forming the morals of the faithful, which they afterwards committed to writing. Such are: that the Christian ought to rejoice in tribulation; that blessed are those who suffer persecution; that one ought to exult in the adoption of sons of God made through Christ; that one ought to hope for the unfading crown of glory; that God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble; that charity is the fullness of the law; that charity covers a multitude of sins; that one ought to lay up treasure in heaven, not on earth; that our conversation ought to be in heaven; that one ought always to pray, to overcome evil with good; to glory in the hope of eternal life; to strive for almsgiving and the salvation of souls.
As to the third point. The author of the Epistle is St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, who, born in Bethsaida in Galilee and living by fishing, was called by Christ and made his vicar on earth, and Pastor and Pontiff of the whole Church: concerning whose admirable wisdom, penance, austerity, charity, zeal, propagation of the faith throughout the whole world (into which he himself sent his disciples to evangelize), passion, martyrdom, privileges, miracles, veneration, fame and glory, see Baronius and other Historians. Indeed, Dionysius the Areopagite, in his work On the Divine Names, chapter III, calls St. Peter the supreme glory, a heavenly ornament, the highest summit of the head, the foundation and the strongest and most ancient pillar of theologians. For Peter is not only the monarch of the Church, but also after Christ the foundational rock. For this reason Christ called him Peter, when he was previously called Simon, to signify that he would be the rock of Faith and of the Church, which neither tyrants, nor Philosophers, nor heretics, nor the wicked could, I do not say overturn, but not even shake. This is what Christ promised to him, who is eternal Truth, saying: "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: that thou art Peter, and upon this rock (upon thee, namely, whom I call and make Cephas, that is, the rock of the Church) I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven," Matthew xvi, 17. Again, to Peter alone among all the Apostles Christ said, and commanded him a third time: "Feed my sheep," John xxi. And about to go to the cross and to death: "Simon," he said, "behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren," Luke xxii, 32.
From which promises and gifts of Christ gather the supreme authority of St. Peter, and his most ample privileges. For twelve privileges to St. Peter alone with respect to the whole Church (for I omit private ones, see them in Bellarmine, book I On the Roman Pontiff, chapter xvii, and following) were granted by Christ. And the first, that he was made by Christ the rock and foundation of the Church. "Although I (Christ) am the inviolable rock, etc., yet thou also art a rock, because by my power thou art made firm, so that those things which are proper to me by power, may be common to me with thee by participation," says St. Leo, sermon 3 On the Anniversary of his Pontificate. Cephas therefore is Cepha. Peter is Rock, namely "Cephalon, and the immovable stone of the Capitol."
Second, that Peter was the head, superior, rector and judge of all the Apostles. Wherefore St. Jerome, in epistle 89 to St. Augustine: "Peter," he says, "was of such great authority, that Paul in his Epistle wrote: Then after three years I went to Jerusalem to see Peter." Theodoret, epistle to Leo: "Paul," he says, "the herald of truth, the trumpet of the Most Holy Spirit, ran to great Peter, so that he might bring from him a solution to those who at Antioch were contending about legal institutions." Hence also St. Evodius, successor of St. Peter in the see of Antioch, in the Epistle which is called τὸ φῶς, teaches that Christ baptized from among women only his Virgin Mother, and from among men only Peter: but from Peter were baptized Andrew, James and John, and from them the rest. And St. Epiphanius, heresy 51: "Peter," he says, "he chose, that he might be the leader of the disciples."
Third, that St. Peter was a hierarch, and that from him all hierarchical order, namely the ordination of all Bishops, priests and other ministers of the Church, as well as jurisdiction, descended. Whence Innocent, in his epistle to the Council of Carthage, which is 91 among the epistles of St. Augustine: "From him (Peter)," he says, "the episcopate itself and all the authority of this name emerged." Julius I, epistle 1 to the Orientals: "The seat of the Blessed Apostle Peter," he says, "is to us the mother of priestly dignity." St. Leo, sermon 3 On His Assumption to the Pontiff: "If anything," he says, "he (Peter) wished to be common with him to the other princes, never, except through him, did he give whatever he did not deny to others." The same, epistle 89: "The Sacrament of this office," he says, "the Lord willed to pertain to the office of all the Apostles in such a way that in the Most Blessed Peter, the supreme prince of all the Apostles, he placed it principally; so that from him as from a certain head, he might diffuse his gifts as into the whole body."
Fourth, that Christ promised and gave to St. Peter and his successors the assistance of the Holy Spirit, for governing the Church and for teaching the true faith, so that it cannot err in it, but what he condemns as heresy, the whole Church likewise condemns as heretical. Whence Innocent I, epistle to the Council of Milevis, which is 93 in St. Augustine: "Whenever," he says, "the matter of faith is discussed, I think all our brothers and fellow bishops ought to refer nothing except to Peter, that is, to the author of his name and honor." This is evident from the use and practice of all ages. For the Roman Pontiffs have declared and resolved all matters doubtful in faith, and have condemned all heresies.
Fifth, that Peter and any Pontiff of Christ represents the person and authority of Christ; just as a viceroy represents the king. Hence Peter was also most similar to Christ and most closely joined to him in life, zeal, propagation of faith, death and martyrdom. Whence St. Gregory in the fourth Penitential Psalm: "To Peter," he says, "Christ said: I come to Rome to be crucified again. For he who had already long since been crucified in himself, said he would be crucified again in Peter." And Tertullian, in the book On Prescription: "You have," he says, "Rome from which authority is also at hand for us. Happy Church, to which the Apostles poured out their entire doctrine with their blood, where Peter is made equal to the passion of the Lord, where Paul is crowned with the death of John." And St. Maximus, sermon 5 On the Birthday of the Holy Apostles: "Peter," he says, "and Paul endured martyrdom in the city of Rome, which holds the principate and head of nations, so that namely where the head of superstition was, there the head of holiness might rest." And St. Paulinus, Birthday 3 of St. Felix:
"And Rome itself, mighty with the sacred monuments of the heavenly princes, Peter and Paul."
Sixth, that St. Peter and his successors the Roman Pontiffs preside over the whole Church as monarchs; and therefore make the Church one, and one kingdom and monarchy of Christ. For just as there is one empire which has one emperor, one kingdom which is ruled by one king, one universe which one God created and governs, one heaven which one sun illuminates: so likewise the Church could not be one visible kingdom of Christ unless it had one visible head, to which the whole would be subject, and by which it would be ruled; which can be nothing other than St. Peter and his successors: just as the human body cannot consist without one head; otherwise indeed it would be headless, lacking reason, government and a ruler. Whence St. Ambrose, sermon 11: "The Lord," he says, "ascended this ship of the Church alone, in which Peter is established as master, the Lord saying: Upon this rock I will build my Church. For just as the ark of Noah, the world being shipwrecked, preserved unharmed all whom it had received; so also the Church of Peter, the age being consumed, will present unharmed all whom it embraces; and just as then, the flood having passed, a dove brought to the ark of Noah the sign of peace: so also, judgment having passed, Christ will bring to the Church of Peter the joy of peace." And St. Augustine, sermon 124 On the Seasons, speaking of the penance of St. Peter: "The sickness of the whole body," he says, "he cures in the very head of the Church, in the very summit he restores the health of all members." And St. Leo, sermon 3 On His Assumption to the Pontificate: "From so great a world," he says, "one Peter is chosen, who is set over both the calling of all nations, and all the Apostles and all the Patriarchs of the Church: so that although there are many priests in the people of God, and many pastors, yet Peter properly rules all those whom Christ principally rules and governs." Therefore, just as a member of the body cannot exist which is separated from the head, and which is not nourished and ruled by the force and influence of the head: so likewise a member of the Church cannot exist, who is separated from Peter and the Roman Pontiff by schism or heresy; nor does he belong to the fold of Christ, who does not belong to the flock of Peter: for those whom Christ cares for and rules, he cares for and rules through Peter his Shepherd. Whence St. Jerome, epistle 1 to Damasus, on the name hypostasis: "Upon that," he says, "rock (the chair of Peter) built the Church I know: whoever eats the lamb outside this house, is profane: if anyone shall not have been in the ark of Noah, he will perish when the flood reigns." And below: "Whoever does not gather with you (O Damasus Pontiff), scatters: that is, whoever is not of Christ, is of Antichrist." St. Cyprian, book I, epistle 8 to the People: "God," he says, "is one, and Christ is one, and the Church is one, and one chair is founded upon Peter by the voice of the Lord. Another altar cannot be set up, or a new priesthood be made apart from one altar, and one priesthood. Whoever gathers elsewhere, scatters." The same, epistle 3 to Cornelius, book I: "For neither," he says, "have heresies arisen from elsewhere, nor have schisms been born, except from this, that obedience is not rendered to the priest of God, nor is one priest in the Church for a time, and for a time a judge in the place of Christ thought of, to whom if the whole brotherhood would obey according to divine teachings, no one would move anything against the college of priests."
Seventh, that the right and empire of Peter is not only more sublime, but also more extensive than that of any Kings and Emperors, both because it extends to the faithful dispersed throughout the whole world; and because it pertains also to infidels, so that he may care to aggregate them to Christ and the Church; and because it exerts itself toward cannibals, Indians and Barbarians, who live without a king, without law, without God. Whence St. Prosper in the Poem on the Ungrateful:
"The seat of Rome of Peter, which made the head of pastoral honor to the world, whatever it does not possess by arms, it holds by religion."
St. Cyril in the Treasury: "To Peter," he says, "all by divine right bow the head, and the primates of the world obey him as Jesus himself." And again: "We ought, as we are members, to adhere to our head the Roman Pontiff, and the Apostolic see." Wherefore the ancients in the Canonical letters (which they called formed), in order to testify that the bearer of them was of orthodox faith and Catholic communion, inscribed the name of Peter. For in the Formed letters from the decree of the Council of Nicaea, these names as it were a token of true faith, through the first letters of them they inscribed: "Father, Son, Holy Spirit, Peter. Amen," so that they might signify that the bearer of them had communion with the chair and successor of St. Peter, the Roman Pontiff, and therefore was Catholic. Whence Optatus of Milevis, book II, in order to prove himself Catholic, and the Donatists to be schismatics, enumerating the Pontiffs who sat in the chair of Peter up to Siricius, adds: "This is our associate, with whom the whole world, by the commerce of Formed letters, agrees with us in one society of communion," Concerning the Donatists moreover he subjoins, that they are far from being able to communicate by Formed letters with the chair of St. Peter. See Baronius, in the year of Christ 325.
Eighth, St. Peter's right and authority pertains not only to the earth, but also to the underworld and the heavens. For he opens heaven not only to earthly men, but also to souls in Purgatory. For he himself is the keeper of the keys of heaven: for he received these keys from Christ, Matt. cap. xvi. Whence Arator at the end of the Acts of the Apostles:
"And matter worthy of the crown of Peter and Paul, to overcome the threats of Caesar, and in the stronghold of the tyrant to open the laws of heaven, and in the highest struggle to overcome the tribunal, lest the small enemy should touch the titles."
St. Bernard, lib. II De Consid. to Eugenius: "You," he says, "can close heaven to a bishop, you can depose him from the episcopate, and even deliver him to Satan." And Optatus of Milevis, lib. VII Contra Parmen.: "For the good of unity," he says, "Blessed Peter merited to be preferred to all the Apostles, and he alone received the keys of the kingdom of heaven to be communicated to the others, etc. So many innocent ones stand, and a sinner receives the keys: so that the matter of unity might be formed, it was provided that a sinner should open to the innocent, lest the innocent should close against sinners, and that unity which is necessary could not exist." And Peter Chrysologus, serm. 107: "Peter," he says, "is the guardian of faith, the rock of the Church and the gatekeeper of heaven."
Ninth, St. Peter's power is propagated to his successors, and with the other Patriarchs failing, it endures unshaken up to this time through 1600 years, and will endure until the end of the world. Whence St. Cyprian, lib. I, epist. 3 to Pope Cornelius: "They dare to sail," he says, "to Peter's chair and to the principal Church, whence the unity of the priesthood arose, bearing letters from schismatics and profane men: nor do they think that they are Romans, to whom perfidy cannot have access." And St. Jerome, epist. 1 to Damasus, concerning the name hypostasis: "With the successor," he says, "of the fisherman and disciple of the cross I speak. I am joined in communion with your blessedness, that is, with the chair of Peter." Hence in the First Council of Ephesus, tom. II, cap. xvi, Celestine the Roman Pontiff is called "the ordinary successor and Vicar of Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles." And in the Council of Chalcedon, act. 2, when the Epistle of Pope Leo was read, all acclaimed: "Peter spoke through Leo;" and in the epistle to Leo, the whole Council says: "That Leo was the interpreter of Peter's voice," that is, that Peter spoke through Leo. Peter, Bishop of Ravenna, epist. to Eutyches, which is found before the Council of Chalcedon: "We exhort," he says, "you, brother, that you attend obediently to those things which have been written by the Blessed Pope of the Roman city. Since Blessed Peter, who both lives and presides in his own see, provides the truth of faith to those who seek it." St. Siricius the Pontiff, epist. to Himerius Bishop of Tarragona: "We bear," he says, "the burdens of all who are burdened. Nay, Blessed Apostle Peter bears these in us, who protects and guards us as heirs of his administration in all things, as we trust."
Tenth, St. Peter's power and dignity surpasses the power of Abraham, Moses, Aaron, Melchizedek, and all the ancient Pontiffs, Patriarchs and Prophets, and to all of these it was foreshadowed and prefigured. Hear St. Bernard to Pope Eugenius, lib. II De Consider.: "Who are you? High priest, supreme Pontiff. You are the prince of Bishops, you are the heir of the Apostles. You have the primacy of Abel, the governance of Noah, the patriarchate of Abraham, the order of Melchizedek, the dignity of Aaron, the authority of Moses, the judgment of Samuel, the power of Peter, the anointing of Christ. You are he to whom the keys have been delivered, to whom the sheep have been entrusted, etc.; and not only of sheep, but of Shepherds too, you alone are the pastor of all."
Eleventh, St. Peter through disciples sent by him founded Churches throughout the whole world. Thus he had Bishops instituted by St. Peter: in Sicily Pancratius, Marcianus, Beryllus; in Capua Priscus, in Naples Aspren, in Tarracina Epaphroditus, in the territory of the Aequicoli Marcus, in Ptolemais Nepe, in Fesulae Romulus, in Lucca Paulinus, in Ravenna Apollinaris, in Verona Euprepius, in Padua Prosdocimus, in Ticinum Syrus, in Aquileia Hermagoras; in Gaul the Limousins, Bordeaux and Toulouse Martial; the Tungrians, Cologne and Trier Maternus; Rheims Sixtus, Arles Trophimus, Sens Sabinianus, Le Mans Julianus, Vienna and Mainz Crescens, Châlons Memnimius, Bourges Urginus, Clermont Austremoine, Saintes Eutropius; Germany Eucharius, Egistus, Marcianus; Spain Torquatus, Ctesiphon, Secundus, Indaletius, Caecilius, Hesychius, etc., as is evident from the Martyrology. St. Peter gave the Byzantines also their first Bishop, as Pope Agapetus teaches in letters which are recited in the Fifth Synod, act. 2. If we believe Metaphrastes, on June 29, Peter, driven from Rome by Claudius in the 9th year of his reign, sailed to Africa, and erected the Church of Carthage, and placed over it Crescens his disciple; thence he went to Alexandria, and having erected the Alexandrian Church, and having instituted Mark as Bishop there, and Rufus in Thebes, he proceeded to Jerusalem.
The historians of English affairs relate that St. Peter sent Joseph of Arimathea into England for the purpose of evangelizing; others say that St. Peter himself went into England and converted the English. Certainly from of old there was a wonderful pastoral care of St. Peter toward the English, and in turn the devotion of the English toward St. Peter. To omit other matters, it is memorable what Alfred writes, an abbot of the Cistercian order, who flourished in the year of the Lord 1164, in the Life of St. Edward, king of the English, namely, "when England was laid waste by the Danes, the royal line was extinct, and it was near to ruin and destruction, a certain Bishop poured forth prayers to God for it with sighs and groans, and soon St. Peter appeared to him, and said that St. Edward would be born, and that he would be a just, holy and strong king, who would remedy all these evils of England. For the kingdom of the English is the kingdom of Christ, and his own. Thus it came to pass: the outcome proved the truth of the oracle. For this reason St. Edward was wonderfully devoted to St. Peter, and St. Peter in turn was beneficent toward him," as the Acts vii, 3 shows. Let the English hear and read these things, that they may see from how great a shepherd they have fallen away, and that they may return to him by restoration, and venerate him in his successor the Roman Pontiff. Thus they will feel his former care and aid. Hear Pope Innocent I, epistle 4: "It is manifest," he says, "that in all Italy, Gaul, Spain, Africa and Sicily, and the islands between, no one has established Churches except those whom the venerable Apostle Peter, or his successors, appointed as priests."
Finally, St. Chrysostom, homily 32 on the Epistle to the Romans: "Not so," he says, "does heaven shine when the sun sends forth its rays from itself, as the city of Rome, pouring forth those two lamps everywhere throughout the earth. Hence Paul will be snatched away, hence Peter. Consider and shudder at what a spectacle Rome is about to see, namely Paul rising suddenly from that sheath with Peter in meeting the Lord carried upward." And Elpis, the wife of Boethius, in a hymn On the Apostles:
"O blessed Rome, who art purpled with the precious blood of such great princes! Not by thy praise, but by their merits, Thou excellest all the beauty of the world."
And St. Leo, sermon 2 On the Birthday of the Apostles: "The Church is not diminished," he says, "by persecutions, but is increased, and always the Lord's field is clothed with a richer harvest, while the grains which fall singly are born multiplied. Whence these two splendid seeds of divine seed germinated into how great an offspring, blessed thousands of Martyrs testify, who, emulating the triumphs of the Apostles, purpled our city, and surrounded it far and wide with gleaming peoples, and as it were crowned it with one diadem from the honor of many gems joined together."
Moreover, Nicephorus, book II, chapter xxxvii, thus depicts the image of St. Peter from ancient pictures: "Peter indeed was not of a thick bodily stature, but of one that was somewhat more upright, with a face rather pale and very white; the hair of his head and beard were curly and thick, but not very prominent; his eyes as if sprinkled with blood (because he is said to have wept constantly), black; his eyebrows nearly plucked out; his nose moreover was longer, indeed not ending in a point, but rather pressed and snub-nosed."
Clement of Alexandria, book VII of the Miscellanies, relates that St. Peter's wife was crowned with the laurel of martyrdom: "They say," he writes, "that when blessed Peter saw his wife being led to death, he was indeed glad because of the calling, and that she was returning home, yet exhorting and urging her greatly, he said to her by her own name: Hey you, remember the Lord. Such was the blessed marriage." It is related that from her he begot St. Petronilla, who, being desired in marriage by Flaccus because of her beauty, obtained death by prayers from God, lest she lose the honor of virginity: whose relics we venerate in Rome in the basilica of St. Peter.
St. Peter with St. Paul died a glorious martyrdom in Rome, because he had overthrown Simon Magus (who was in favor with Nero because of his magical arts), crucified head downward, feet upward, as he had requested (lest he be equal to Christ the Lord), in the Vatican, in the year of the Lord 69, the 13th and penultimate year of Nero, on the 29th day of June, having sat in Rome for 24 years, 3 months, 11 days. Whence Tertullian, book On Prescription, chapter xxxvi: "In Rome," he says, "Peter is made equal to the passion of the Lord, because he was crucified as Christ was." And in the Scorpiace, chapter xiv: "Nero first stained the faith of the East in Rome: then Peter is girded by another, when he is bound to the cross." And St. Chrysostom, homily on the Prince of the Apostles: "Rejoice," he says, "Peter, who hast enjoyed the wood of the cross, and in the likeness of thy master, thou didst not wish to be crucified in the upright figure, as our Lord, but rather with thy head inverted as if preparing a journey from earth to heaven. O those blessed nails, which pierced those most holy members!" He was buried likewise in the Vatican near the Triumphal Way: Constantine the Great Emperor adorned the place of his burial with a magnificent basilica, which in this age the Pontiffs have built anew from the foundations, but far greater, over a hundred years, so august and magnificent that it appears to be a marvel of the city and of the world.
Christians from all ages have been accustomed to visit her from the whole world for the sake of religion, and to prostrate themselves prone at her very threshold, and to venerate holy Peter and humbly to implore his aid. Hear St. Augustine, sermon 28 On the Saints: "Now the knees of the Emperor are bent to the memory of the Fisherman: there gems of the diadem shine, where the benefits of the Fisherman gleam forth." And epistle 42 to Madaur.: "You see," he says, "the most eminent summit of the most noble empire, supplicating at the sepulchre of the fisherman Peter with bowed diadem." And St. Chrysostom, homily That Christ is God: "Leaving all things behind, both kings and governors and soldiers run to the sepulchres of the fisherman and the tentmaker (Paul who made tents from hides): and in Constantinople our kings consider it a great honor, if not to be buried near the Apostles, but if even outside their vestibules to have their bodies buried, and to become doorkeepers of the fishermen as kings."
In Rome therefore where Peter the martyr fell, there also the victor rose again, and having overthrown Nero, the emperors and idolatry, as conqueror he occupies the city and the world: from the Vatican he directs, rules and defends Rome, and the Roman faith and Church, as it were the mother, teacher and mistress of all Churches; so that hitherto heresy and perfidy have not been able to shake her, nor ever shall be able to; because namely she is built upon a firm rock, so that the gates of hell cannot prevail against her. Look down upon us from on high, St. Peter, and protect your citizens, nay your clients and children, and through the storms of this life direct us in the way of eternal salvation, so that when the course of this pilgrimage is completed, with you opening the gates of heaven we may enter in, and with you and Christ Jesus our Lord deserve to enjoy eternal bliss. Amen.
Machine translation from the Latin, not reviewed.
Estius
PROOEMIUM 6 paragraphs
Duas Epistolas a Petro Apostolo scriptas agnoscit, et in Canonem Scripturae sacrae, jam inde ab initio, recepit Ecclesia. Et quidem de hac priore (quod testatur Eusebius lib. 3. eccles. hist. cap. 3. et 4.) nulla fuit umquam controversia, quin et ipsius Petri esset, qui in fronte noroinatur, imo se ipsum nominat, et proinde libris canonicis accenseri deberet. Sed de posteriore a quibus, et quam ob causam aliquando dubitatum fuarit, suo loco dicemus. Existimat Erasmus in argumento, quodpraemisitparaplirasi hujus Epistolae, ac rarsus in ipsa paraphrasi capitis ultimi, Petrum ante has duas aliam adhuc et ad eosdem Epistolam scripsisse, propterea quod in fine hujus dicat: Per Silvanum fidelem fratrem vobis, ut ar~ hitror, breviter scripsi. Sed manifeste eam opinionem redarguunt illa verba posterioris Epistolae cap. 3.: Hanc ecce vobis, carissimi, secundam scribo Epistolam. Non enim secundam, sed tertiam dicere debuit, si duas jam antea scripserat. Porro dicens, so per Silvanum scripsisse, non de alia, sed de hac ipsa loquitur Epistola. Sicut Paulus in fine Epistolae ad Hebraeos: Perpaucis scripsi vobis, utique de illa ipsa loquens Epistola.
Ad quos autem haec scripta sit, ipsa statim initio declarat epigraphe, qua dicitur: Advenis dispersionis Ponti, Galatiae etc. Ubi quia primo loco Pontus inter regiones, ad quas missa est, nominatur, a veteribus Epistola ad Ponticos apellata fuit, ut a Tertulliano in fine Scorpiaci adversus Gnost. et a Cypriano lib. 3. test. cap. 36. et 37.
Quaeritur autem, utrum ad Judaeos, an ad gentiles scripta sit. Ad gentiles scriptam fuisse, ex eo videtur ostendi, quod cap. 2. dicit: Qui aliquando Nonpopulus Dei, nunc autem populus Dei; qui non consecuti misericordiam, nunc autem misericordiam consecuti. Hoc enim testimonium, ex Osee Propheta sumptum, Paulus ad Rom. 9. de vocatione gentium interpretatur. Huc et alia quaedam faciunt; ut illud ejusdem capitis: Et ipsi tamquam lapides vivi superaedificamini. Quasi dicat: Non tantum qui ex Judaeis, sed etiam vos, qui ex' gentibus; quomodo ferme Paulus loquitur Ephes. 2. Deinde, quod dicitur cap. 1.: Quem citm non videritis, diligitis. Item: Ncn configurati prioribus ignorantiae vestrae desideriis. Ac rursum: Redempti estis de vana vestra conversatione paternae traditionis. Haec enim ad gentes proprie pertinere videntur. Rursum, quod dicitur cap. 4.: Sufficit praeteritum ttmpus ad voluntatem gentium consummandam his, qui ambulaverunt in luxuriis. Denique addit: Et illicitis idolorum cultibus. Quod utique ad gentiles, qui idololatrae fuerant, dictura apparet. Haec Augustini sententia est lib. 22. contra Faustum cap. 89. et Joannis Hesselii iu comment.
At vero alii complures in diversa sunt sententia, ut Eusebius lib. 3. hist. cap. 4. et Hieronymus in catal. script. eccl. Item commentatores, Didymus, Oecumenius, Cajetanus, Titelmannus et Erasmus, ac praeterea Canus lib. 2. de locis Theologicis, Baronius tom. 1. Annalium et Ribera in prooemio super Epistolam ad Hebraeos. Hi omnes scriptam esse volunt hanc Epistolam ad Judaeos, quod id palam ostendant mcmorata verba inscriptionis: Advenis dispersionis. Nam dispersionis nomine Judaeos per orbem dispersos etiam Jacobus significavit in exordio sUae Epistolae; quamvis illic addat: duodecim tribubus. Sed ejus loco Petrus dicit: advenis. Neque enim gentiles advenae erant earum regionum, quas Petrus ibi recenset, sed Judaei iu illis commorantes. Accedit, quod cap. 2. dicit: Conversationem vestram inter gentes habentes bonam, et cap. 3. de Saia ad mulieres: Cujus estis filiae, benefacientes, id est, sic respondebitis generi vestro. His addi potest argumentum ex 2. Epistola, quae ad eosdem scripta est. Nam quod in ea dicitur cap. 1.: Habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem, ad Judaeos proprie spectat, apud quos, etsi jam fideles, adhuc tamen Prophetarum erat major auctoritas, quam Apostolorum. Quin et ex priori Epistola cap. 1. simile argumentum accipi potest, quum et ibi in ipso adhuc exordio Prophetas in testimonium vocet salutis per Christum promissae.
Est autem et tertia sententia quorundam, qui scriptam putant ad proselytos, velut significatos advenarum vocabulo. Ita Venerabilis Eeda, glossator et Liranus. Sed feUuntur. Neque enim uUae erant Ecclesiae proseljtorum propriae, sed cum Judaeis, quorum religionem susceperant, communes. Nec erat ratio, cur ad eos specialiter scriberet, quando, jam Evangelio gentibus praedicato, fas non erat, quemquam ex iis circumcidi et proselytum fieri. Advenas autem quosPetrus dicat, jam indicavimus, et amplius exponetur in commentario.
Hac igitur opinione rejecta, primum illud satis arbitror ex inscriptione constare, scriptam esse Epistolam hanc, saltem principaliter, ad Judaeos, qui erant in dispersione, sicut et Epistolam Jacobi. Verum quia Judaei fideles, in dispersione constituti cum gentilibus eorundem locorum in Christum credentibus, tamquam fratribus, ccmmxmicabant, imo etiam Episcopos et Ecclesias cum eis habebant communes (erat enim unius civitatis unus tantum Episcopus): idcirco etiam ad gentiles scriptam esse, probabile est, eoque pertinere ea loca, quae pro prima sententia adducebantar. Inscribit autem Epistolam ad Judaeos, ut Apostolus circumcisionis; quemadmodum e contrario Paulus, ut Apostohis praeputii et doctor gentium, praecipue suas Epistolas ad gentiles dirigit; quamvis et Romae, et Cerinthi et alibi essent etiam Judaei inter fideles illos, ad quos scribit. Unam excipio Epistolam ad Hebraeos, quae ad Judaeos, eosque solos, a Paulo scripta est. Hac igitur ratione prima sententia cum secunda probe conciliari potest; tametsi non desint, qui contendant, ad solos Judaeos hanc Epistolam, aeque ut illam B. Jacobi, scriptam esse, et, quae in diversum allata sunt, dihiere conentur. Qua de re aliquid in commentario, cum ad ea loca ventum erit, dicturi sumus, Deo propitio.
iVRGUMENTlM EPSTOLAE PUIMAE 3 paragraphs
Id hac Epistola potissimum id agit Apostolus Petrus, ut Judaeos ad Christum conversos, qui gentium regiones, ut dictum est, incolebant, in fide Christi confirmet, docens, eos in professione su- Bcepta constantes esse debere, eamque vita et moribus exornare; ita futurum, ut haereditatis coelestis, ad quam vocati essent, participes fiant. Huc autem varias adhibet exhortationes et praecepta. de retinenda in rebus adversis patientia, de servanda vitae innocentia ac puritate, de obedientia praestanda magistratibus, de honesta et Christiana conjugum inter se conversatione, de vitanda profana gentium consuetudine. Tum invitat ad vigilantiam, sobrietatem, orandi &tudiam, humilitatem, hospitalitatem ac caetera officia caritatis in proximos. Atque his praeceptis passim admiscet rationes et suasiones a fidei nostrae mysteriis petitas. Ultimo capite, tamquam ipsorum etiam pastorum pastor, seniores, id est Episcopos ac presbyteros, hortatur, quomodo in Ecclesiarum suarum regimine gerere se debeant.
Est autem Epistola, quemadmodum de ea vere et graviter testatur Erasmus, profecto digna Apostolorum Principe, plena auctoritatis ac majestatis Apostolicae, veibis parca, sententiis differta. Poiro qui volet cognoscere, quam consentiant in doctrina Petrus et Paulus, percurrat hujus Epistolae sententias et praecepta quaeque praecipua, et inveniet, ea mirifice convenire cum iis, quae Paulus tradit in variis Epistolis; nec dubitabit, ab uno spiritu profectam esse utriusque doctrinam.
Quod ad locum attinet, e Babylone scriptam esse, significat ipse in calce Epistolae. Sed Babylonis nomine Romam typice illic esse designatam, propter confusionem idololatriae, quae Romae tunc vigebat, communis est et valde probabilis opinio; ut in urbe Romana Bcriptam esse, non sit, cur magnopere ambigaraus. Sed hac de re plura in ejus loci commentario. Quando scripta sit, non liquet; nisi quod ex jam dictis satis intelligitur, non prius scriptam esse, quam Petrus Romam venerit. Illud etiam constat ex cap. 4., ubi dicitur: Bi autem ut Christianus, scriptam esse, postquam discipuli jam inceperant cognorainari Christiani. Quod quo tempore factum sit, indicat historia Act. 11.