St. Jerome unhesitatingly explained the rock of Peter and his successors in the See of Rome. Addressing Pope Damasus, and seeking his instructions in regard to the use of the term hypostases, he says: "Let it not appear invidious: let the pomp of Roman majesty withdraw: I speak with the successor of the fisherman, and a disciple of the cross. I, who follow no one first except Christ, am united in communion with your Holiness, that is, WITH THE CHAIR OF PETER: ON THAT ROCK I KNOW THAT THE CHURCH IS BUILT. Whoever eats the lamb out of this house is profane. Whoever was not in the ark of Noe must perish in the deluge."* Respectfully approaching the heir of Peter's faith, Jerome begs that his boldness may be excused, and reminds Damasus, encompassed with a splendor like that of imperial majesty, that his greatest dignity is that of successor of the fisherman. This is his imperishable title: his highest glory as this authority is the fundamental and immoveable principle of the Church. We have in this passage the obvious meaning of the text with its application in the most direct and positive manner.

Of Augustin, the brightest luminary of the African Church-perhaps of the Church at large since the days of the apostles, I have already admitted that he partially receded from the general interpretation of the rock on which Christ built His Church, without, however, abandoning it altogether. He must not on that account be thought to have called in question the primacy of Peter, or to have been doubtful as to the force of the various passages which regard it. On the contrary his testimony on these points is most unequivocal. Even when indulging somewhat in allegorical expositions, he does not forget the literal meaning.

:

"The Church," says he, "happy in hope, does this in this wretched life of which Church Peter the apostle, ON ACCOUNT OF THE PRIMACY OF HIS APOSTLESHIP, sustained the person, in a figurative universality. For, as to what strictly regards himself, he was by nature an individual man, by grace an individual Christian; but, by more abundant grace, he was an apostle, and the FIRST: but when it was said to him: To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed also in heaven,'-he represented the whole Church, which in this world is agitated by various temptations, as by showers, floods, and tempests, and which does not fall, because it is founded on the rock, whence Peter derived his name."†

* Ep. xv. Damaso.

† S. Aug. Tract. 124, in c. 21. Joan. Ev.

"Therefore," says he, "the Church, which is founded on Christ, received, through Peter, the keys of the kingdom of heaven, that is, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is, strictly speaking, in Christ, Peter is the same mystically in the rock: according to which signification Christ is the rock, Peter the Church. This Church, therefore, which Peter represented, as long as she is in the midst of evils, is freed from evils, by loving and following Christ. And she follows him, especially by means of those who contend unto death, for the truth. But to the multitude is said, 'follow me ;' for which multitude Christ suffered." In pursuing this allegorical explanation, Augustin evidently presupposes that the keys were given to Peter, and that in him, the Church received them, inasmuch as not for himself only-" an individual man, an individual Christian”—but for all the Church, he, who was "an apostle and first of the apostles" received this power. "For all the saints," says he, "inseparably belonging to the body of Christ, PETER, THE FIRST OF THE APOSTLES, received the keys of the kingdom, for its government in this most tempestuous life, to bind and loose sins ;|| and with reference to the same saints, John the Evangelist reclined on the bosom of Christ, to express the most tranquil repose of this most secret life" with God. John is said to represent or signify the Church triumphant, inasmuch as, reposing on the bosom of Jesus, he presents an image of the happiness of the saints. The representative character of Peter is clearly marked as official and authoritative, directed to the government of the Church militant in this stormy life. He is the pilot placed by Christ at the helm ; he is the ruler, having received from Christ the keys of His kingdom.

I shall hereafter have occasion to adduce many other passages in which Augustin recognises Peter as the pastor to whom Christ entrusted His sheep, and extols his apostolic principality, and acknowledges the privileges of his chair. In the mean time I may be permitted to close

* "Quod est enim per proprietatem in Christo Ecclesia, hoc est per significationem Petrus in petra, qua significatione intelligitur Christus petra, Petrus Ecclesia." Ib.

"Sed universitati dicitur: sequere me." To all the Church the command is directed.

"Ecclesia ergo, quæ'fundatur in Christo, claves ab eo regni cœlorum accepit in Petro, id est potestatem ligandi solvendique peccata." Tract cxxiv.

in Joan.

§ "Abundantiore gratia unus idemque primus Apostolorum." Ibidem.

Ibidem.

the series of sacred interpreters with the great pontiff St. Leo, who occupied the chair of St. Peter towards the middle of the fifth century

He observes: "Christ having assumed him to a participation in His indivisible unity, was pleased that he should be styled what He Himself was, saying: Thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church that the building of the eternal temple by the wonderful gift of the grace of God should rest on the solidity of the rock, strengthening His Church by this firmness, so that neither human temerity could affect it, nor the gates of hell prevail against it. But whosoever attempts to infringe on his power, indulges excessive and impious presumption, in seeking to violate the most sacred firmness of this rock, God, as we have said, being the builder."* This exposition loses nothing of its weight from the fact that St. Leo filled, at the time, the chair of Peter. His learning and sanctity, and the high veneration in which he was held in the Church, and which still continues, do not suffer us to consider him as influenced by personal interest, or ambition, in expounding the sacred text. He spoke the truth in Christ, with no other view than that all should adore the divine wisdom and power manifested in the establishment of the Church. Throughout his writings many similar passages occur.

From the numerous and lengthy quotations which I have given, it is manifest that the general exposition of the texts in question, by the Christian writers of the first five centuries, teaches us that Peter is the rock on which Christ has built His Church, and the ruler to whom He has given, under the emblem of the keys, supreme authority in His kingdom. The fathers who say that the Church is built on the faith which Peter confessed, or on the confession of Peter, do not dissent from the former exposition, since their meaning plainly is, that the Church is built on Peter confessing the faith. The moral and allegorical interpretations or applications of the text, in which some have indulged, presuppose the literal meaning, so that we may fairly claim the general support of Christian antiquity for the meaning which we attach to the passages in question. This will be the more manifest from the many testimonies which I shall hereafter have occasion to bring forward. It will be seen that the interpretation of the sacred text was not merely theoretical, but illustrated in the very organization and government of the Church, which having commenced before the writing of any of the Gospels, has claims of priority not easily to be disregarded.

T. ii. op. col. 1315.

CHAPTER V.

PETER, BISHOP OF ROME.

HAVING proved from the sacred scripture, on strict principles of exegesis, and according to the general interpretation of the fathers of the first five centuries, that Peter received from Christ an authoritative Primacy, which must always continue in the Church, and be exercised by his successors, it becomes necessary to show who succeeds to his privileges. The task is an easy one, as the voice of all antiquity proclaims the Bishop of Rome to be the successor of Peter. There have been some bold men who have pushed scepticism so far as to deny that St. Peter ever was at Rome, as some unbelievers have questioned whether Jesus Christ ever existed; but even Calvin, with every disposition to deny the fact, blushed to oppose the testimony of all the ancients; and Cave, the learned Anglican critic, strongly and fearlessly affirms it. He says: "We intrepidly affirm with all intiquity, that Peter was at Rome, and for some time resided there." He adds: “All both ancient and modern, will, I think, agree with me that Peter may be called bishop of Rome in a less strict sense, inasmuch as he laid the foundations of this Church, and rendered it illustrious by his martyrdom."* Babylon, from which the first letter of St. Peter was written, is understood by learned interpreters, Protestant as well as Catholic, to mean Rome; the Christians being accustomed to designate it in this way, on account of its vices which resembled the corruption of the ancient city, and to avoid offence of the heathens. Thus St. John is generally understood to have pourtrayed the crimes and calamities of Pagan Rome in the mysterious descriptions of the Apocalypse.

For a matter of fact human testimony is entirely sufficient, whenever it is clothed with those qualities which remove all just fear of deception. If it were otherwise, Christianity itself would vanish from our grasp; for its certain transmission to us implies a number of facts independent of any testimony of Scripture; and the authenticity and integrity of the sacred books are dependent on human testimony, at least, for all who deny the authority of the Christian Church.

Sæc. Apostol. S. Petrus.

Clement, bishop of Rome, a contemporary of the apostles, mentioned with honor by St. Paul, and who was ordained by Peter, according to the testimony of Tertullian, and succeeded him, after Linus and Cletus, wrote to the Corinthians, before the close of the first century. In this letter he mentions Peter and Paul as suffering martyrdom at Rome under his eyes.* Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, when led to martyrdom, about the year 105, wrote to the Romans, begging of them to place no obstacle by their prayers to the fulfilment of his ardent desire to die for Christ: "I do not command you," he 66 says, as Peter and Paul: they were apostles: I am a condemned man." This shews that the Romans had been instructed by both apostles, and received their commands. Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, a disciple of John the apostle, or of another John, a contemporary of the apostle, states that Mark related in his Gospel what he heard from Peter at Rome, and that Peter wrote his first epistle from Rome, calling it Babylon.‡ Irenæus states that Peter and Paul preached the Gospel at Rome, and established the Church: and he calls this Church "greatest and most authoritative," (or ancient) "known to all, founded and established by the most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul," and he gives the list of bishops from the apostles down to his own time.§

Denys of Corinth, a writer of the second century, says that both apostles, Peter and Paul, instructed the Corinthians, and afterwards passing to Italy, having instructed the Romans, consummated their course by martyrdom in their city.|| Cajus, a Roman priest, who lived at the close of the second and beginning of the third century, says: "I can shew you the trophies of the apostles: for whether we go to the Vatican, or to the Ostien way, we shall meet with the trophies of the founders of this Church." Origen also testifies that Peter suffer

66

ed martyrdom at Rome.**

That Paul was not the original founder of the Church at Rome, is evident from his epistle to the Romans, in which he states his earnest desire to see them, which up to that time he had not been able to gratify, and he praises their faith as celebrated throughout the whole. world. We must, then hold Peter to have preached the faith, and established the Church in that city, since all antiquity recognises no

Cor. n. 5, 6.

† Ep. ad Rom.

Apud Euseb. 1. II. c. xv. hist. eccl.

§ L. III. hær. c. i.

Apud Euseb. 1. II. c. xxv.

¶ L. adv. Proculum apud Euseb. hist. eccl. 1. II. c. xv.

** Ib. 1. III. c. i.