church, was issued by "the apostles and elders and brethren,” in short, "the whole church." (Acts xv. 22, 23.) The chief authority was therefore not in Peter, nor in the apostles, but in the whole body of believers. X. Jesus did not recognize Peter as his favorite apostle. John was distinguished as the apostle whom Jesus loved; he was the only one mentioned as having been present at the crucifixion (John xix. 26), and to him Jesus intrusted the care of his mother (Ib. 27). When Peter wished to know which of the twelve would betray Christ, he did not venture to ask directly, but induced John to inquire for him. (Ib. xiii. 24-26.) XI. By implication Paul repeatedly denied the existence of any personal supremacy. He said, "In nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles." (2 Cor. xii. 11.) This phrase indicates that there was no one chief apostle. In another passage he says: "God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets." (Ib. 28.) If he had recognized a supremacy, he must have said: "first the supreme head of the church, second the other apostles, third prophets." Instead of recognizing any superior power in the church, the entire course of Paul as a Christian missionary was independent of control, in faith and discipline. Twice Paul, in mentioning apostles, did not give the first place to Peter (Gal. ii. 9; 1 Cor. ix. 5) when using his name. The Papacy rests on five assertions, each of which is indispensable as a support of its claims, and each of which is false. These are that Jesus established a supremacy in his church; that he conferred this supremacy on Peter; that Peter was a bishop; that Jesus provided that the supremacy should be transmitted to the successors of Peter in the episcopal office; and that Peter became bishop of Rome. If these assertions were true, it would be a most remarkable fact that the New Testament, instead of sustaining all, should furnish a great preponderance of evidence against each of them. In giving the history of the apostolic church since 60 a. D., Acts indirectly asserts that Peter never went to Rome, nor to Europe, nor even to Asia Minor. Of Paul, a much less important personage in the Roman Catholic history, we are told that he went to Ephesus, Athens, Corinth, Thessalonica, Philippi, Malta, Syracuse, Reggio, Puteoli, and Rome. If Peter had been bishop of Rome from 42 to 67 A. D., Paul would not have written his epistle to the Romans, which not only does not mention Peter, but says, "I speak to you He Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles." (Rom. xi. 13.) This implies that Peter never had been in Rome and that he had no right to be there. But even if Paul had not claimed to be the apostle of the Gentiles, and if he had mentioned Peter in respectful terms, still it would be a gross violation of ecclesiastical etiquette and of hierarchical subordination, for a subordinate to send a pastoral letter to the diocese of the head of the church. Paul was not the man to meddle with the churches established by others. As field for his missionary labors, he purposely selected those cities which no other apostle had previously visited. declared that he would not "build upon another man's foundation." (Ib. xv. 20.) His letters to and from Rome imply that he was the first apostle to labor there. In his letters sending messages by name to and from more than thirty Christians in Rome, Paul never mentioned Peter among them. (7b. xvi. 1-15; Phil. iv. 22; Col. iv. 7-14; 2 Tim. iv. 11-20; Philemon i. 23, 24.) If the Roman Catholic tradition of the long continued and widespread labors of St. Peter in Asia Minor and Europe, where Christianity achieved its most important conquests, were true, Paul would not have claimed that he had made more converts than all the other apostles, as he did when he wrote, "I labored more abundantly than they all.” I Cor. xv. 10. The tradition that Peter was in Rome comes to us through Eusebius (104), who accepts the authority of Dionysius, and the latter, writing about 170 A. D., destroys his own credibility by asserting, in defiance of the New Testament, that Peter co-operated with Paul in planting the church of Corinth as well as that of Rome. SEC. 540. Causes of Success.-'Acts ii. 22. John ix. 3. Ib. vii. 5. Mark vi. 4. The most comprehensive statement of the facts in relation to the use of the four gospels before 175 A. D., is given in Supernatural Religion, which has had a great influence on public opinion. The ablest reply to it is that of W. Sanday, who admits the correctness of his opponent on all the points of greatest importance. Waite gives a good account of the history of Christianity for a century and a half after the death of Jesus. In regard to the relations between Paul and the other apostles, the chief authority is C. F. Baur. LIST OF AUTHORITIES CITED IN THIS VOLUME. This list includes some books, the titles of which should have been given in the preceding volumes. Alger, W. R., A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life, New York, 1878. Amos, Sheldon, The History of the Principles of the Civil Law of Rome, London, 1883. Anonymous, see Supernatural Religion. Arnold, Thomas, The History of Rome, New York, 1851. Arnold, W. T., The Roman System of Provincial Administration, London, 1879. Baur, F. C., Paul the Apostle, translated by A. Menzies, 2 vols., London, 1875 Becker, The Church History of the First Three Centuries, translated by A. Menzies, 2 vols., London, 1878. Charicles, translated, New York, 1866. Beckman, J. A., A History of Inventions, translated, 2 vols., London, 1846. Beesley, A. H., The Gracchi, Marius, and Sulla, London, 1879. Bible, The Holy, authorized version. Bluntschli, J. C., and K. Brater, Deutsches Staatswoerter Buch, 11 vols., Stuttgart, 1864. Browne, R. W., A History of Roman Classical Literature, London, 1884. Calvin, J., Institutes of the Christian Religion, translated by J. Cancalon, V., Histoire de l'Agriculture a la mort de Candolle, A. de, The Origin of Cultivated Plants, New York, 1885. Cicero, M. T., The Orations of, translated by C. D. Yonge, 4 vols., London, 1880. The Treatises of, translated by C. D. Yonge, London, 1876. Coleridge, S. T., The Complete Works of, 7 vols., New York, 1853. Contemporary Review. Coulanges, F. de, The Ancient City, translated by W. Small, Boston, 1874. Deutsches Staatswoerter Buch; see Bluntschli. Dhammapada, The, translated by F. Max Muller, Oxford, 1881. Duruy, V., The History of Rome, translated by Ripley & Clarke, 7 vols., Boston, 1883. Edwards, Jonathan, The Works of, 4 vols., New York, 1855. Finlay, G., Greece under the Romans, London, 1857. Friedlander, L., Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Roms, 3 vols., Leipzig, 1873. Froude, J. A., Cæsar, New York, 1879. Gaius, Elements of Roman Law, with a translation and commentary, by E. Poste, Oxford, 1875. Gibbon, E., History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 6 vols., New York, 1870. Goettling, K. W., Geschichte der Roemischen Staatsverfassung, Halle, 1840. Guhl, E., and W. Koner, The Life of the Greeks and Romans, translated by F. Huefer, New York, 1875. Guizot, M., Histoire de la Civilisation en Europe, Paris, 1864. Holmes, O. W., Over the Teacups, Boston, 1891. Holub, E., South Africa, 2 vols., Boston, 1881. Hooke, W., The Roman History, 6 vols., London, 1821. Hunter, W. A., A Systematic and Historical Exposition of Roman Law, London, 1885. Ihering, R. von, Geist des Roemischen Rechts, 4 vols., Leipzig, 1878. Ihne, W., The History of Rome, 4 vols., London, 1871. Keller, Ferdinand, The Lake Dwellings of Switzerland, translated, London, 1845. Keller, Fritz, The Amazon and Madeira Rivers, Philadelphia, 1876. Lecky, W. E. H., History of European Morals, 2 vols., New York, 1877. Lewis, G. C., The Credibility of Early Roman History, 2 vols., London, 1855. Liddell, H. G., A History of Rome, New York, 1879. Lindsay, W. S., A History of Merchant Shipping, 4 vols., London, 1874. Livy, T., History of Rome, translated, 4 vols., London, 1850. Long, G., The Decline of the Roman Republic, 5 vols., London, Mahaffy, J. P., Alexander's Empire, New York, 1887. Marezoll, T., Lehrbuch der Institutionen, Leipzig, 1881. Martin, H., Histoire de France, 17 vols., Paris, 1864. Martineau, James, The Seat of Authority in Religion, London, 1890. Massillon, Oeuvres Complètes de, 10 vols., Paris, 1821. McClintock, J., and J. Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, 12 vols., New York, 1883. Medhurst, W. H., The Foreigner in Far Cathay, London, 1872. Merivale, C., History of the Romans under the Empire, 4 vols., 1866. A General History of Rome, New York, 1875. Middleton, C., The Life of M. T. Cicero, London, 1839. Milman, H. H., The History of Christianity, 3 vols., New York, 1871. Mommsen, T., History of Rome, translated by W. P. Dickson, 4 vols., New York, 1870. The Provinces of the Roman Empire, translated by W. P. Dickson, New York, 1887. Roemische Forshungen, 2 vols., Berlin, 1864. Roemische Staatsrecht, 3 vols., Berlin, 1871-88. Mosheim, J. L. von, Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, translated by J. Murdock, 3 vols., New York, 1851. Muller, Max, Lectures on the Science of Language, 2 vols., New York, 1865-66. Chips from a German Workshop, 5 vols., New York, 1876-81. Napier, J., Manufacturing Arts in Ancient Times, London, 1874. Napoleon, L., Vie de César, 2 vols., New York, 1867. Neander, A., History of the Planting of the Christian Church, translated by J. E. Ryland, New York, 1865. Niebuhr, B. G., History of Rome, translated, 2 vols., London, 1844. 66 Lectures on Roman History, translated, 3 vols., Norton, A., A Translation of the Gospels, 2 vols., Boston, 1855. |