Lives of the apostles of Jesus ChristBacon, David Francis
Religion
Lives of the apostles of Jesus Christ
Bacon, David Francis
Apostles
its first bishop,――both suffering martyrdom at Rome on the same
day; Peter being crucified and Paul decapitated. There is no
representation of Peter’s being any more bishop of Rome than
Paul was;――and Irenaeus in particular, expressly makes Linus the
first bishop, and to be ordained by the two apostles.
We now come to Eusebius, who wrote about A. D. 325. He quotes
most of the fathers above cited, but departs widely from them,
in regard to the time, and the occasion, of Peter’s going to
Rome. He says it was in the reign of Claudius;――and for the
purpose of opposing Simon Magus, (as the Clementine novels
represented the matter.) Yet he does not make Peter to be bishop
of Rome. The subsequent writers of the fourth and following
centuries, agree with Eusebius as to the time and the occasion
of Peter’s going to Rome; and most of them make Peter to be the
first bishop of Rome. According to them, Peter remained in Judea
only about four years after the ascension; then he was bishop
of Antioch seven years, and in the second year of Claudius,
A. D. 43, removed his chair to Rome, where he was bishop for
twenty-five years, or until his death, A. D. 68. And this is
the account generally given by the papists, quite down to the
present times.
OBJECTIONS TO THE TRADITIONARY HISTORY OF PETER.
1. So far as the later fathers contradict those of the three
first centuries, they ought to be rejected; because, they could
not have so good means of information. Oral tradition must, in
three centuries, have become worthless, compared with what it
was in the second and third centuries;――and written testimony,
which could be relied on, they had none, except that of the
early fathers. Besides, we have seen how these later fathers
were led astray. They believed the fable of Simon Magus’s
legerdemain at Rome, and his deification there. They read the
Clementine fictions, and supposed them to be novels founded on
facts. In their eulogies of Peter, they were fond of relating
marvelous and affecting stories about him, and therefore too
readily admitted fabulous traditions. And lastly, the bishops
of Rome and their numerous adherents had a direct and an immense
interest depending on this traditional history;――for by it alone,
they made out their succession to the chair of Peter, and the
legitimacy of their ghostly power.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account