The Internet Archive discovers and captures web pages through many different web crawls.At any given time several distinct crawls are running, some for months, and some every day or longer.View the web archive through theWayback Machine.
Content crawled via theWayback Machine Live Proxy mostly by the Save Page Now feature on web.archive.org.
Liveweb proxy is a component of Internet Archive’s wayback machine project. The liveweb proxy captures the content of a web page in real time, archives it into a ARC or WARC file and returns the ARC/WARC record back to the wayback machine to process. The recorded ARC/WARC file becomes part of the wayback machine in due course of time.
TIMESTAMPS
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20190106221943/http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm
St. Peter'strue and original name was Simon, sometimes occurring in the formSymeon. (Acts 15:14;2 Peter 1:1). He was the son of Jona (Johannes) and was born inBethsaida (John 1:42, 44), a town onLake Genesareth, the position of which cannot be established withcertainty, although it is usually sought at the northern end of the lake. TheApostle Andrew was his brother, and theApostle Philip came from the same town.
Capharnaum
Simon settled inCapharnaum, where he was living with his mother-in-law in his own house (Matthew 8:14;Luke 4:38) at the beginning ofChrist's public ministry (about A.D. 26-28). Simon was thus married, and, according toClement of Alexandria (Stromata, III, vi, ed. Dindorf, II, 276), had children. The same writer relates thetradition that Peter's wife sufferedmartyrdom (ibid., VII, xi ed. cit., III, 306). Concerning these facts, adopted byEusebius (Church History III.31) fromClement, the ancientChristian literature which has come down to us is silent. Simon pursued inCapharnaum the profitable occupation of fisherman inLake Genesareth, possessing his own boat (Luke 5:3).
Peter meets Our Lord
Like so many of hisJewish contemporaries, he was attracted by theBaptist's preaching ofpenance and was, with his brotherAndrew, amongJohn's associates inBethania on the eastern bank of theJordan. When, after theHigh Council had sent envoys for the second time to theBaptist, the latter pointed toJesus who was passing, saying, "Behold theLamb of God",Andrew and anotherdisciple followed theSaviour to his residence and remained with Him one day.
Later, meeting his brother Simon,Andrew said "We have found theMessias", and brought him toJesus, who, looking upon him, said: "Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is interpreted Peter". Already, at this first meeting, theSaviour foretold the change of Simon's name to Cephas (Kephas; AramaicKipha, rock), which is translatedPetros (Latin,Petrus) aproof thatChrist had already special views with regard to Simon. Later, probably at the time of his definitive call to the Apostolate with the eleven otherApostles,Jesus actually gave Simon the name of Cephas (Petrus), after which he was usually called Peter, especially byChrist on the solemn occasion after Peter's profession offaith (Matthew 16:18; cf. below). TheEvangelists often combine the two names, whileSt. Paul uses the name Cephas.
Peter becomes a disciple
After the first meeting Peter with the other earlydisciples remained withJesus for some time, accompanying Him toGalilee (Marriage atCana),Judaea, andJerusalem, and throughSamaria back toGalilee (John 2-4). Here Peter resumed his occupation of fisherman for a shorttime, but soon received the definitive call of theSaviour to become one of His permanentdisciples. Peter andAndrew were engaged at their calling whenJesus met and addressed them: "Come ye after me, and I will make you to be fishers ofmen". On the same occasion the sons of Zebedee were called (Matthew 4:18-22;Mark 1:16-20;Luke 5:1-11; it is here assumed thatLuke refers to the same occasion as the otherEvangelists). Thenceforth Peter remained always in the immediate neighbourhood ofOur Lord. After preaching the Sermon on the Mount and curing the son of thecenturion inCapharnaum,Jesus came to Peter's house and cured his wife's mother, who was sick of a fever (Matthew 8:14-15;Mark 1:29-31). A little laterChrist chose HisTwelve Apostles as His constant associates in preaching thekingdom of God.
Growing prominence among the Twelve
Among theTwelve Peter soon became conspicuous. Though of irresolutecharacter, he clings with the greatest fidelity, firmness offaith, and inwardlove to theSaviour; rash alike in word and act, he is full ofzeal and enthusiasm, though momentarily easily accessible to external influences and intimidated by difficulties. The more prominent theApostles become in theEvangelical narrative, the more conspicuous does Peter appear as the first among them. In the list of theTwelve on the occasion of their solemn call to the Apostolate, not only does Peter stand always at their head, but the surnamePetrus given him byChrist is especially emphasized (Matthew 10:2): "Duodecim autem Apostolorum nomina haec: Primus Simon qui dicitur Petrus. . .";Mark 3:14-16: "Et fecit ut essent duodecim cum illo, et ut mitteret eos praedicare . . . et imposuit Simoni nomen Petrus";Luke 6:13-14: "Et cum dies factus esset, vocavit discipulos suos, et elegit duodecim ex ipsis (quos et Apostolos nominavit): Simonem, quem cognominavit Petrum . . ." On various occasions Peter speaks in the name of the otherApostles (Matthew 15:15;19:27;Luke 12:41, etc.). WhenChrist's words are addressed to all theApostles, Peter answers in their name (e.g.,Matthew 16:16). Frequently theSaviour turns specially to Peter (Matthew 26:40;Luke 22:31, etc.).
In especially solemn fashionChrist accentuated Peter's precedence among theApostles, when, after Peter had recognized Him as theMessias, He promised that he would be head of His flock.Jesus was then dwelling with HisApostles in the vicinity ofCaesarea Philippi, engaged on His work ofsalvation. AsChrist's coming agreed so little in power andglory with the expectations of theMessias, many different views concerning Him were current. While journeying along with HisApostles,Jesus asks them: "Whom do men say that theSon of man is?" TheApostles answered: "SomeJohn the Baptist, and other someElias, and othersJeremias, or one of theprophets".Jesus said to them: "But whom do you say that I am?" Simon said: "Thou artChrist, theSon of the living God". AndJesus answering said to him: "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is inheaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter [Kipha, a rock], and upon this rock [Kipha] I will build mychurch [ekklesian], and the gates ofhell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee thekeys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also inheaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also inheaven". Then he commanded hisdisciples, that they should tell no one that he wasJesus theChrist (Matthew 16:13-20;Mark 8:27-30;Luke 9:18-21).
By the word "rock" theSaviour cannot have meant Himself, but only Peter, as is so much more apparent in Aramaic in which the same word (Kipha) is used for "Peter" and "rock". His statement then admits of but one explanation, namely, that He wishes to make Peter the head of the whole community of those whobelieved in Him as thetrueMessias; that through this foundation (Peter) theKingdom of Christ would be unconquerable; that the spiritual guidance of thefaithful was placed in the hands of Peter, as thespecial representative ofChrist. This meaning becomes so much the clearer when weremember that the words "bind" and "loose" are not metaphorical, butJewish juridical terms. It is also clear that the position of Peter among the otherApostles and in theChristian community was the basis for theKingdom of God on earth, that is, theChurch of Christ. Peter was personally installed as Head of theApostles byChrist Himself. This foundation created for theChurch by itsFounder could not disappear with theperson of Peter, but was intended to continue and did continue (as actual history shows) in theprimacy of theRoman Church and itsbishops.
Entirely inconsistent and in itself untenable is the position ofProtestants who (like Schnitzer in recent times) assert that theprimacy of theRoman bishops cannot bededuced from the precedence which Peter held among theApostles. Just as the essential activity of theTwelve Apostles in building up and extending theChurch did not entirely disappear with their deaths, so surely did theApostolicPrimacy of Peter not completely vanish. As intended byChrist, it must have continued itsexistence and development in aform appropriate to theecclesiastical organism, just as the office of theApostles continued in an appropriateform.
Objections have been raised against thegenuineness of the wording of the passage, but the unanimous testimony of themanuscripts, the parallel passages in the otherGospels, and the fixedbelief of pre-Constantine literature furnish the surestproofs of thegenuineness and untampered state of the text ofMatthew (cf. "Stimmen aus Maria Laach", I, 1896,129 sqq.; "Theologie und Glaube", II, 1910, 842 sqq.).
WhenChrist proceeded towash the feet of Hisdisciples before theLast Supper, and came first to Peter, the latter at first protested, but, onChrist's declaring that otherwise he should have no part with Him, immediately said: "Lord, not only my feet, but also my hands and my head" (John 13:1-10). In theGarden of Gethsemani Peter had to submit to theSaviour's reproach that he had slept like the others, while hisMaster suffered deadlyanguish (Mark 14:37). At the seizing ofJesus, Peter in an outburst ofanger wished to defend hisMaster byforce, but was forbidden to do so. He at first took to flight with the otherApostles (John 18:10-11;Matthew 26:56); then turning he followed his captured Lord to the courtyard of theHigh Priest, and there deniedChrist, asserting explicitly and swearing that heknew Him not (Matthew 26:58-75;Mark 14:54-72;Luke 22:54-62;John 18:15-27). This denial was of course due, not to a lapse of interiorfaith inChrist, but to exteriorfear and cowardice. His sorrow was thus so much the greater, when, after hisMaster had turned His gaze towards him, he clearly recognized what he had done.
The Risen Lord confirms Peter's precedence
In spite of this weakness, his position as head of theApostles was later confirmed byJesus, and his precedence was not less conspicuous after theResurrection than before. Thewomen, who were the first to findChrist's tomb empty, received from theangel a special message for Peter (Mark 16:7). To him alone of theApostles didChrist appear on the first day after theResurrection (Luke 24:34;1 Corinthians 15:5). But, most important of all, when He appeared at theLake of Genesareth,Christ renewed to Peter His special commission to feed and defend His flock, after Peter had thrice affirmed his speciallove for hisMaster (John 21:15-17). In conclusionChrist foretold theviolent death Peter would have to suffer, and thus invited him to follow Him in a special manner (John 21:20-23). Thus was Petercalled and trained for theApostleship and clothed with theprimacy of theApostles, which he exercised in a most unequivocal manner afterChrist's Ascension intoHeaven.
St. Peter in Jerusalem and Palestine after the Ascension
Our information concerning the earliestApostolic activity of St. Peter inJerusalem,Judaea, and the districts stretching northwards as far asSyria is derived mainly from the first portion of theActs of the Apostles, and is confirmed by parallel statements incidentally in theEpistles ofSt. Paul.
In the subsequent examinations of the twoApostles before theJewish High Council, Peter defends in undismayed and impressive fashion the cause ofJesus and theobligation and liberty of theApostles to preach the Gospel (Acts 4:5-21). When Ananias and Sapphira attempt to deceive theApostles and the people Peter appears as judge of their action, andGod executes thesentence of punishment passed by theApostle by causing the sudden death of the two guilty parties (Acts 5:1-11). By numerousmiraclesGod confirms theApostolic activity ofChrist'sconfessors, and here also there is special mention of Peter, since it is recorded that the inhabitants ofJerusalem and neighbouring towns carried their sick in their beds into the streets so that the shadow of Peter might fall on them and they might be thereby healed (Acts 5:12-16). The ever-increasing number of thefaithfulcaused theJewish supreme council to adopt new measures against theApostles, but "Peter and theApostles" answer that they "ought toobeyGod rather than men" (Acts 5:29 sqq.). Not only inJerusalem itself did Peter labour in fulfilling the mission entrusted to him by hisMaster. He also retained connection with the otherChristian communities in Palestine, and preached the Gospel both there and in the lands situated farther north. When Philip the Deacon had won a large number of believers inSamaria, Peter and John were deputed to proceed thither fromJerusalem to organize the community and to invoke theHoly Ghost to descend upon thefaithful. Peter appears a second time as judge, in the case of themagician Simon, who had wished to purchase from theApostles the power that he also could invoke theHoly Ghost (Acts 8:14-25). On their way back to Jerusalem, the twoApostles preached thejoyous tidings of theKingdom of God. Subsequently, afterPaul's departure fromJerusalem andconversion beforeDamascus, theChristian communities in Palestine were left at peace by theJewish council.
Peter now undertook an extensive missionary tour, which brought him to the maritime cities,Lydda,Joppe, and Caesarea. InLydda he cured the palsied Eneas, inJoppe he raised Tabitha (Dorcas) from the dead; and atCaesarea, instructed by a vision which he had inJoppe, hebaptized and received into theChurch the firstnon-JewishChristians, thecenturionCornelius and his kinsmen (Acts 9:31-10:48). On Peter's return to Jerusalem a little later, the strictJewish Christians, who regarded the complete observance of theJewish law as binding on all, asked him why he had entered and eaten in the house of theuncircumcised. Peter tells of his vision and defends his action, which was ratified by theApostles and thefaithful inJerusalem (Acts 11:1-18).
A confirmation of the position accorded to Peter byLuke, in theActs, is afforded by the testimony ofSt. Paul (Galatians 1:18-20). After hisconversion and three years' residence inArabia,Paul came to Jerusalem "to see Peter". Here theApostle of the Gentiles clearly designates Peter as the authorized head of theApostles and of the earlyChristian Church. Peter's long residence inJerusalem and Palestine soon came to an end.Herod Agrippa I began (A.D. 42-44) a newpersecution of theChurch inJerusalem; after the execution of James, the son of Zebedee, this ruler had Peter cast intoprison, intending to have him also executed after theJewishPasch was over. Peter, however, was freed in amiraculous manner, and, proceeding to the house of themother of John Mark, where many of thefaithful were assembled forprayer, informed them of his liberation from the hands ofHerod, commissioned them to communicate the fact to James and the brethren, and then leftJerusalem to go to "another place" (Acts 12:1-18). Concerning St. Peter's subsequent activity we receive no further connected information from the extant sources, although we possess short notices of certain individual episodes of his later life.
Missionary journeys in the East; Council of the Apostles
His conduct made a great impression on the otherJewishChristians atAntioch, so that even Barnabas,St. Paul's companion, now avoided eating with theChristianizedpagans. As this action was entirely opposed to the principles and practice ofPaul, and might lead to confusion among theconvertedpagans, thisApostle addressed a public reproach to St. Peter, because his conduct seemed to indicate a wish to compel thepaganconverts to becomeJews and acceptcircumcision and theJewish law. The whole incident is anotherproof of the authoritative position of St. Peter in the earlyChurch, since his example and conduct was regarded as decisive. ButPaul, who rightly saw the inconsistency in the conduct of Peter and theJewishChristians, did not hesitate to defend the immunity ofconvertedpagans from theJewish Law. Concerning Peter's subsequent attitude on this questionSt. Paul gives us no explicit information. But it is highly probable that Peter ratified the contention of theApostle of the Gentiles, and thenceforth conducted himself towards theChristianizedpagans as at first. As the principal opponents of his views in this connexion,Paul names and combats in all his writings only theextreme Jewish Christians coming "from James" (i.e., fromJerusalem). While thedate of this occurrence, whether before or after the Council of the Apostles, cannot be determined, it probably took place after the council (see below). The latertradition, which existed as early as the end of the second century (Origen, "Hom. vi in Lucam"; Eusebius,Church History III.36), that Peter founded theChurch of Antioch, indicates the fact that he laboured a long period there, and also perhaps that he dwelt there towards the end of his life and then appointedEvodrius, the first of the line ofAntiochianbishops, head of the community. This latter view would best explain thetradition referring the foundation of theChurch of Antioch to St. Peter.
It is also probable that Peter pursued hisApostolic labours in various districts ofAsia Minor for it can scarcely be supposed that the entire period between his liberation fromprison and the Council of the Apostles was spent uninterruptedly in one city, whether Antioch,Rome, or elsewhere. And, since he subsequently addressed thefirst of his Epistles to thefaithful in the Provinces ofPontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, andAsia, one may reasonably assume that he had laboured personally at least in certain cities of these provinces, devoting himself chiefly to theDiaspora. The Epistle, however, is of a general character, and gives little indication of personal relations with thepersons to whom it is addressed. Thetradition related by Bishop Dionysius of Corinth (in Eusebius,Church History II.25) in his letter to theRoman Church underPope Soter (165-74), that Peter had (likePaul) dwelt inCorinth and planted theChurch there, cannot be entirely rejected. Even though thetradition should receive no support from the existence of the "party of Cephas", whichPaul mentions among the other divisions of theChurch ofCorinth (1 Corinthians 1:12;3:22), still Peter's sojourn inCorinth (even in connection with the planting and government of theChurch byPaul) is not impossible. That St. Peter undertook variousApostolic journeys (doubtless about this time, especially when he was no longer permanently residing inJerusalem) is clearly established by the general remark ofSt. Paul in1 Corinthians 9:5, concerning the "rest of theapostles, and thebrethren [cousins] of the Lord, and Cephas", who were travelling around in the exercise of theirApostleship.
Peter returned occasionally to the originalChristian Church ofJerusalem, the guidance of which was entrusted toSt. James, therelative of Jesus, after the departure of the Prince of the Apostles (A.D. 42-44). The last mention of St. Peter in the Acts (15:1-29; cf.Galatians 2:1-10) occurs in the report of the Council of the Apostles on the occasion of such a passing visit. In consequence of the troublecaused byextreme Jewish Christians toPaul and Barnabas atAntioch, theChurch of this city sent these twoApostles with other envoys to Jerusalem to secure a definitive decision concerning theobligations of theconvertedpagans (seeJUDAIZERS). In addition to James, Peter and John were then (about A.D. 50-51) inJerusalem. In the discussion and decision of this important question, Peter naturally exercised a decisive influence. When a great divergence of views had manifested itself in the assembly, Peter spoke the deciding word. Long before, in accordance withGod's testimony, he had announced theGospels to theheathen (conversion ofCornelius and hishousehold); why, therefore, attempt to place theJewish yoke on the necks ofconvertedpagans? AfterPaul and Barnabas had related howGod had wrought among theGentiles by them, James, the chief representative of theJewishChristians, adopted Peter's view and in agreement therewith made proposals which were expressed in anencyclical to theconvertedpagans.
The occurrences inCaesarea and Antioch and the debate at the Council of Jerusalem show clearly Peter's attitude towards theconverts frompaganism. Like the other eleven originalApostles, he regarded himself as called to preach theFaith inJesus first among theJews (Acts 10:42), so that the chosen people ofGod might share in thesalvation inChrist, promised to them primarily and issuing from their midst. The vision atJoppe and the effusion of theHoly Ghost over theconvertedpaganCornelius and hiskinsmen determined Peter to admit these forthwith into the community of thefaithful, without imposing on them theJewish Law. During hisApostolic journeys outside Palestine, he recognized in practice the equality ofGentile andJewishconverts, as his original conduct at Antiochproves. His aloofness from theGentileconverts, out of consideration for theJewishChristians fromJerusalem, was by no means an official recognition of the views of the extremeJudaizers, who were so opposed toSt. Paul. This is established clearly and incontestably by his attitude at the Council of Jerusalem. Between Peter andPaul there was nodogmatic difference in their conception ofsalvation forJewish andGentileChristians. The recognition ofPaul as theApostle of theGentiles (Galatians 2:1-9) was entirely sincere, and excludes all question of a fundamental divergence of views. St. Peter and the otherApostles recognized theconverts frompaganism asChristian brothers on an equal footing;Jewish andGentileChristians formed a singleKingdom of Christ. If therefore Peter devoted the preponderating portion of hisApostolic activity to theJews, this arose chiefly from practical considerations, and from the position ofIsrael as the Chosen People. Baur's hypothesis of opposing currents of "Petrinism" and "Paulinism" in the earlyChurch is absolutely untenable, and is today entirely rejected byProtestants.
Activity and death in Rome; burial place
It is an indisputably established historical fact that St. Peter laboured inRome during the last portion of his life, and there ended his earthly course bymartyrdom. As to the duration of hisApostolic activity in theRoman capital, the continuity or otherwise of his residence there, the details and success of his labours, and thechronology of his arrival and death, all these questions are uncertain, and can be solved only on hypotheses more or less well-founded. The essential fact is that Peter died atRome: this constitutes the historical foundation of the claim of theBishops of Rome to theApostolicPrimacy of Peter.
St. Peter's residence and death inRome are established beyond contention as historical facts by a series of distinct testimonies extending from the end of the first to the end of the second centuries, and issuing from several lands.
That the manner, and therefore the place of his death, must have beenknown in widely extendedChristian circles at the end of the first century is clear from the remark introduced into theGospel of St. John concerningChrist'sprophecy that Peter was bound to Him and would be led whither he would not — "And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorifyGod" (John 21:18-19, see above). Such a remark presupposes in the readers of theFourth Gospel aknowledge of the death of Peter.
St. Peter's First Epistle was written almost undoubtedly fromRome, since the salutation at the end reads: "Thechurch that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my sonMark" (5:13). Babylon must here be identified with theRoman capital; sinceBabylon on the Euphrates, which lay in ruins, or New Babylon (Seleucia) on the Tigris, or theEgyptian Babylon nearMemphis, orJerusalem cannot be meant, the reference must be toRome, the only city which is called Babylon elsewhere in ancientChristian literature (Revelation 17:5;18:10; "Oracula Sibyl.", V, verses 143 and 159, ed. Geffcken,Leipzig, 1902, 111).
Another testimony concerning themartyrdom of Peter andPaul is supplied byClement of Rome in hisEpistle to the Corinthians (written about A.D. 95-97), wherein he says (chapter 5): "Throughzeal and cunning the greatest and most righteous supports [of theChurch] have sufferedpersecution and been warred to death. Let us place before our eyes thegoodApostles — St. Peter, who in consequence ofunjustzeal, suffered not one or two, but numerous miseries, and, having thus given testimony (martyresas), has entered the meritedplace of glory". He then mentionsPaul and a number ofelect, who were assembled with the others and sufferedmartyrdom "among us" (en hemin, i.e., among the Romans, the meaning that the expression also bears inchapter 4). He is speaking undoubtedly, as the whole passageproves, of theNeronianpersecution, and thus refers themartyrdom of Peter andPaul to that epoch.
In his letter written at the beginning of the second century (before 117), while being brought toRome formartyrdom, the venerableBishop Ignatius of Antioch endeavours by every means to restrain theRomanChristians from striving for his pardon, remarking: "I issue you no commands, like Peter andPaul: they wereApostles, while I am but a captive" (Epistle to the Romans 4). The meaning of this remark must be that the twoApostles laboured personally inRome, and withApostolic authority preached the Gospel there.
Bishop Dionysius of Corinth, in his letter to theRoman Church in thetime ofPope Soter (165-74), says: "You have therefore by your urgent exhortation bound close together the sowing of Peter andPaul atRome andCorinth. For both planted the seed of the Gospel also inCorinth, and together instructed us, just as they likewise taught in the same place inItaly and at the sametime sufferedmartyrdom" (in Eusebius,Church History II.25).
In his "Hypotyposes" (Eusebius,Church History IV.14),Clement of Alexandria, teacher in thecatecheticalschool of that city from about 190, says on the strength of thetradition of thepresbyters: "After Peter had announced the Word of God inRome and preached the Gospel in thespirit of God, the multitude of hearers requested Mark, who had long accompanied Peter on all his journeys, to write down what theApostles had preached to them" (see above).
LikeIrenaeus,Tertullian appeals, in his writings againstheretics, to theproof afforded by theApostolic labours of Peter andPaul inRome of thetruth ofecclesiastical tradition. InDe Præscriptione 36, he says: "If thou art nearItaly, thou hastRome where authority is ever within reach. How fortunate is thisChurch for which theApostles have poured out their whole teaching with their blood, where Peter has emulated the Passion of the Lord, wherePaul wascrowned with the death ofJohn". InScorpiace 15, he also speaks of Peter's crucifixion. "The buddingfaithNero first made bloody inRome. There Peter was girded by another, since he was bound to the cross". As an illustration that it was immaterial with what waterbaptism is administered, he states in his book (On Baptism 5) that there is "no difference between that with whichJohnbaptized in theJordan and that with which Peterbaptized in the Tiber"; and againstMarcion he appeals to the testimony of theRomanChristians, "to whom Peter andPaul have bequeathed the Gospel sealed with their blood" (Against Marcion 4.5).
The Roman,Caius, who lived inRome in thetime ofPope Zephyrinus (198-217), wrote in his "Dialogue with Proclus" (in Eusebius,Church History II.25) directed against theMontanists: "But I can show the trophies of theApostles. If you care to go to theVatican or to the road toOstia, thou shalt find the trophies of those who have founded thisChurch". By the trophies (tropaia)Eusebius understands thegraves of theApostles, but his view is opposed by modern investigators whobelieve that the place ofexecution is meant. For our purpose it is immaterial which opinion is correct, as the testimony retains its full value in either case. At any rate the place ofexecution andburial of both were close together; St. Peter, who was executed on theVatican, received also hisburial there.Eusebius also refers to "theinscription of the names of Peter andPaul, which have been preserved to the present day on the burial-places there" (i.e. atRome).
There thus existed inRome an ancient epigraphic memorial commemorating the death of theApostles. The obscure notice in theMuratorian Fragment ("Lucas optime theofile conprindit quia sub praesentia eius singula gerebantur sicuti et semote passionem petri evidenter declarat", ed. Preuschen, Tübingen, 1910, p. 29) also presupposes an ancient definitetradition concerning Peter's death inRome.
In opposition to this distinct and unanimous testimony of earlyChristendom, some fewProtestant historians have attempted in recent times to set aside the residence and death of Peter atRome as legendary. These attempts have resulted in complete failure. It was asserted that thetradition concerning Peter's residence inRome first originated inEbionite circles, and formed part of the Legend ofSimon the Magician, in whichPaul is opposed by Peter as afalseApostle underSimon; just as this fight was transplanted toRome, so also sprang up at an earlydate the legend of Peter's activity in that capital (thus in Baur, "Paulus", 2nd ed., 245 sqq., followed by Hase and especiallyLipsius, "Die quellen der römischen Petrussage", Kiel, 1872). But this hypothesis isproved fundamentally untenable by the whole character and purely local importance ofEbionitism, and is directly refuted by the above genuine and entirely independent testimonies, which are at least as ancient. It has moreover been now entirely abandoned by seriousProtestant historians (cf., e.g., Harnack's remarks in "Gesch. der altchristl. Literatur", II, i, 244, n. 2). A more recent attempt was made by Erbes (Zeitschr. fur Kirchengesch., 1901, pp. 1 sqq., 161 sqq.) to demonstrate that St. Peter wasmartyred atJerusalem. He appeals to theapocryphal Acts of St. Peter, in which two Romans, Albinus and Agrippa, are mentioned as persecutors of theApostles. These he identifies with the Albinus,Procurator ofJudaea, and successor of Festus andAgrippa II, Prince ofGalilee, and thence conciudes that Peter was condemned todeath andsacrificed by thisprocurator atJerusalem. The untenableness of this hypothesis becomes immediately apparent from the mere fact that our earliest definite testimony concerning Peter's death inRome far antedates theapocryphal Acts; besides, never throughout the whole range ofChristian antiquity has any city other thanRome been designated the place ofmartyrdom of Sts. Peter andPaul.
Although the fact of St. Peter's activity and death inRome is so clearly established, we possess no precise information regarding the details of hisRoman sojourn. The narratives contained in theapocryphal literature of the second century concerning the supposed strife between Peter andSimon Magus belong to the domain oflegend. From the already mentioned statements regarding the origin of theGospel of St. Mark we may conclude that Peter laboured for a long period inRome. This conclusion is confirmed by the unanimous voice oftradition which, as early as the second half of the second century, designates the Prince of theApostles the founder of theRoman Church. It is widely held that Peter paid a first visit toRome after he had beenmiraculously liberated from theprison inJerusalem; that, by "another place",Luke meantRome, but omitted the name for special reasons. It is not impossible that Peter made a missionary journey toRome about this time (after 42 A.D.), but such a journey cannot be established withcertainty. At any rate, we cannot appeal in support of this theory to the chronological notices inEusebius andJerome, since, although these notices extend back to the chronicles of the third century, they are not oldtraditions, but the result of calculations on the basis of episcopal lists. Into theRoman list of bishopsdating from the second century, there was introduced in the third century (as we learn fromEusebius and the "Chronograph of 354") the notice of a twenty-five years' pontificate for St. Peter, but we are unable to trace its origin. This entry consequently affords no ground for the hypothesis of a first visit by St. Peter toRome after his liberation fromprison (about 42). We can therefore admit only the possibility of such an early visit to thecapital.
The task of determining the year of St. Peter's death is attended with similar difficulties. In the fourth century, and even in the chronicles of the third, we find two different entries. In the "Chronicle" ofEusebius the thirteenth or fourteenth year ofNero is given as that of the death of Peter andPaul (67-68); thisdate, accepted byJerome, is that generally held. The year 67 is also supported by the statement, also accepted byEusebius andJerome, that Peter came toRome under the Emperor Claudius (according toJerome, in 42), and by the above-mentionedtradition of the twenty-five years' episcopate of Peter (cf. Bartolini, "Sopra l'anno 67 se fosse quello del martirio dei gloriosi Apostoli", Rome, 1868) . A different statement is furnished by the "Chronograph of 354" (ed. Duchesne,"Liber Pontificalis", I, 1 sqq.). This refers St. Peter's arrival inRome to the year 30, and his death and that ofSt. Paul to 55.
Duchesne has shown that thedates in the "Chronograph" were inserted in alist of the popes which contains only their names and the duration of their pontificates, and then, on the chronological supposition that the year ofChrist's death was 29, the year 30 was inserted as the beginning of Peter's pontificate, and his death referred to 55, on the basis of the twenty-five years' pontificate (op. cit., introd., vi sqq.). Thisdate has however been recently defended by Kellner ("Jesus von Nazareth u. seine Apostel im Rahmen der Zeitgeschichte", Ratisbon, 1908; "Tradition geschichtl. Bearbeitung u. Legende in der Chronologie des apostol. Zeitalters", Bonn, 1909). Other historians have accepted the year 65 (e.g.,Bianchini, in his edition of the"Liber Pontificalis" in P.L. CXXVII. 435 sqq.) or 66 (e.g. Foggini, "De romani b. Petri itinere et episcopatu", Florence, 1741; alsoTillemont). Harnack endeavoured to establish the year 64 (i.e. the beginning of theNeronianpersecution) as that of Peter's death ("Gesch. der altchristl. Lit. bis Eusebius", pt. II, "Die Chronologie", I, 240 sqq.). Thisdate, which had been already supported by Cave, du Pin, and Wieseler, has been accepted by Duchesne (Hist. ancienne de l'église, I, 64). Erbes refers St. Peter's death to 22 Feb., 63,St. Paul's to 64 ("Texte u. Untersuchungen", new series, IV, i,Leipzig, 1900, "Die Todestage der Apostel Petrus u. Paulus u. ihre rom. Denkmaeler"). Thedate of Peter's death is thus not yet decided; the period between July, 64 (outbreak of theNeronianpersecution), and the beginning of 68 (on 9 JulyNero fled fromRome and committedsuicide) must be left open for thedate of his death. The day of hismartyrdom is also unknown; 29 June, the accepted day of hisfeast since the fourth century, cannot be proved to be the day of his death (see below).
Concerning the manner of Peter's death, we possess atradition — attested to byTertullian at the end of the second century (see above) and byOrigen (in Eusebius,Church History II.1)—that he suffered crucifixion.Origen says: "Peter was crucified atRome with his head downwards, as he himself had desired to suffer". As the place ofexecution may be accepted with great probability the Neronian Gardens on theVatican, since there, according to Tacitus, were enacted in general the gruesome scenes of theNeronianpersecution; and in this district, in the vicinity of the Via Cornelia and at the foot of the Vatican Hills, the Prince of theApostles found hisburial place. Of this grave (since the wordtropaion was, as already remarked, rightly understood of thetomb)Caius already speaks in the third century. For atime theremains of Peter lay with those ofPaul in a vault on the Appian Way at the placead Catacumbas, where the Church of St. Sebastian (which on its erection in the fourth century wasdedicated to the twoApostles) now stands. Theremains had probably been brought thither at the beginning of theValerianpersecution in 258, to protect them from the threateneddesecration when the Christian burial-places were confiscated. They were later restored to their former resting-place, andConstantine the Great had a magnificentbasilica erected over the grave of St. Peter at the foot of theVatican Hill. Thisbasilica was replaced by the present St. Peter's in the sixteenth century. The vault with thealtar built above it (confessio) has been since the fourth century the most highlyveneratedmartyr's shrine in theWest. In the substructure of thealtar, over the vault which contained the sarcophagus with theremains of St. Peter, acavity was made. This was closed by a small door in front of thealtar. By opening this door the pilgrim could enjoy the greatprivilege ofkneeling directly over the sarcophagus of theApostle. Keys of this door were given as previous souvenirs (cf.Gregory of Tours, "De gloria martyrum", I, xxviii).
The memory of St. Peter is also closely associated with theCatacomb of St. Priscilla on the Via Salaria. According to atradition, current in laterChristian antiquity, St. Peter here instructed thefaithful and administeredbaptism. Thistradition seems to have been based on still earlier monumental testimonies. Thecatacomb is situated under the garden of a villa of the ancientChristian and senatorialfamily, the Acilii Glabriones, and its foundation extends back to the end of the first century; and sinceAcilius Glabrio, consul in 91, was condemned todeath underDomitian as aChristian, it is quite possible that theChristian faith of thefamily extended back toApostolic times, and that the Prince of theApostles had been given hospitable reception in their house during his residence atRome. The relations between Peter and Pudens whose house stood on the site of the present titular church of Pudens (now Santa Pudentiana) seem to rest rather on a legend.
Concerning the Epistles of St. Peter, seeEPISTLES OF SAINT PETER; concerning the variousapocrypha bearing the name of Peter, especially the Apocalypse and the Gospel of St. Peter, seeAPOCRYPHA. Theapocryphal sermon of Peter (kerygma),dating from the second half of the second century, was probably a collection of supposedsermons by theApostle; several fragments are preserved byClement of Alexandria (cf. Dobschuts, "Das Kerygma Petri kritisch untersucht" in "Texte u. Untersuchungen", XI, i, Leipzig, 1893).
Feasts of St. Peter
As early as the fourth century afeast was celebrated inmemory of Sts. Peter andPaul on the same day, although the day was not the same in the East as inRome. TheSyrianMartyrology of the end of the fourth century, which is an excerpt from a Greek catalogue ofsaints fromAsia Minor, gives the followingfeasts in connexion withChristmas (25 Dec.): 26 Dec.,St. Stephen; 27 Dec., Sts. James and John; 28 Dec., Sts. Peter andPaul. InSt. Gregory of Nyssa's panegyric onSt. Basil we are also informed that thesefeasts of theApostles andSt. Stephen follow immediately afterChristmas. TheArmenians celebrated thefeast also on 27 Dec.; theNestorians on the second Friday after theEpiphany. It is evident that 28 (27) Dec. was (like 26 Dec. forSt. Stephen) arbitrarily selected, notradition concerning thedate of thesaints' death being forthcoming. The chieffeast of Sts. Peter andPaul was kept inRome on 29 June as early as the third or fourth century. The list offeasts of themartyrs in the Chronograph of Philocalus appends this notice to the date — "III. Kal. Jul. Petri in Catacumbas et Pauli Ostiense Tusco et Basso Cose." (=the year 258) . The "Martyrologium Hieronyminanum" has, in theBernemanuscript, the following notice for 29 June: "Romae via Aurelia natale sanctorum Apostolorum Petri et Pauli, Petri in Vaticano, Pauli in via Ostiensi, utrumque in catacumbas, passi sub Nerone, Basso et Tusco consulibus" (ed. de Rossi-Duchesne, 84).
Thedate 258 in the notices shows that from this year the memory of the twoApostles was celebrated on 29 June in the Via Appiaad Catacumbas (near San Sebastiano fuori le mura), because on thisdate the remains of theApostles were translated thither (see above). Later, perhaps on the building of thechurch over thegraves on theVatican and in the Via Ostiensis, the remains were restored to their former resting-place: Peter's to theVatican Basilica andPaul's to thechurch on the Via Ostiensis. In the placeAd Catacumbas achurch was also built as early as the fourth century inhonour of the twoApostles. From 258 their principalfeast was kept on 29 June, on whichdatesolemn Divine Service was held in the above-mentioned threechurches from ancient times (Duchesne, "Origines du culte chretien", 5th ed., Paris, 1909, 271 sqq., 283 sqq.; Urbain, "Ein Martyrologium der christl. Gemeinde zu Rom an Anfang des 5. Jahrh.", Leipzig, 1901, 169 sqq.; Kellner, "Heortologie", 3rd ed., Freiburg, 1911, 210 sqq.). Legend sought to explain the temporary occupation by theApostles of the graveAd Catacumbas by supposing that, shortly after their death, theOriental Christians wished to steal their bodies and bring them to the East. This whole story is evidently a product of popular legend. (Concerning theFeast of theChair of Peter, seeC P.)
A thirdRomanfeast of theApostles takes place on 1 August: thefeast of St. Peter's Chains. Thisfeast was originally thededicationfeast of thechurch of theApostle, erected on the Esquiline Hill in the fourth century. A titularpriest of thechurch, Philippus, waspapal legate at theCouncil of Ephesus in 431. Thechurch was rebuilt bySixtus III (432-40) at the expense of the Byzantine imperialfamily. Either thesolemnconsecration took place on 1 August, or this was the day ofdedication of the earlierchurch. Perhaps this day was selected to replace theheathen festivities which took place on 1 August. In thischurch, which is still standing (S. Pietro in Vincoli), were probably preserved from the fourth century St. Peter's chains, which were greatlyvenerated, small filings from the chains being regarded as preciousrelics. Thechurch thus early received the namein Vinculis, and thefeast of 1 August became thefeast of St. Peter's Chains (Duchesne, op. cit., 286 sqq.; Kellner, loc. cit., 216 sqq.). The memory of both Peter andPaul was later associated also with two places of ancientRome: the Via Sacra, outside the Forum, where themagician Simon was said to have been hurled down at theprayer of Peter and theprisonTullianum, orCarcer Mamertinus, where theApostles were supposed to have been kept until theirexecution. At both these places, also, shrines of theApostles were erected, and that of theMamertine Prison still remains in almost its original form from the early Romantime. These local commemorations of theApostles are based on legends, and no special celebrations are held in the twochurches. It is, however, not impossible that Peter andPaul were actually confined in the chiefprison inRome at the fort of the Capitol, of which the presentCarcer Mamertinus is a remnant.
Representations of St. Peter
The oldest extant is the bronze medallion with the heads of theApostles; thisdates from the end of the second or the beginning of the third century, and is preserved in theChristian Museum of theVaticanLibrary. Peter has a strong, roundish head, prominent jaw-bones, a receding forehead, thick, curly hair andbeard. (See illustration inC.) The features are soindividual that it partakes of the nature of a portrait. This type is also found in two representations of St. Peter in a chamber of the Catacomb of Peter and Marcellinus,dating from the second half of the third century (Wilpert, "Die Malerein der Katakomben Rom", plates 94 and 96). In thepaintings of thecatacombs Sts. Peter andPaul frequently appear asinterceders and advocates for the dead in the representations of theLast Judgment (Wilpert, 390 sqq.), and as introducing anOrante (apraying figure representing the dead) intoParadise.
In the numerous representations ofChrist in the midst of HisApostles, which occur in thepaintings of thecatacombs and carved on sarcophagi, Peter andPaul always occupy the places ofhonour on the right and left of theSaviour. In themosaics of theRomanbasilicas,dating from the fourth to the ninth centuries,Christ appears as the central figure, with Sts. Peter andPaul on His right and left, and besides these thesaints especiallyvenerated in the particular church. On sarcophagi and other memorials appear scenes from the life of St. Peter: his walking onLake Genesareth, whenChrist summoned him from the boat; theprophecy of his denial; thewashing of his feet; the raising of Tabitha from the dead; the capture of Peter and the conducting of him to the place ofexecution. On two gilt glasses he is represented asMoses drawing water from the rock with his staff; the name Peter under the scene shows that he is regarded as the guide of the people ofGod in theNew Testament.
Particularly frequent in the period between the fourth and sixth centuries is the scene of the delivery of the Law to Peter, which occurs on various kinds of monuments.Christ hands St. Peter a folded or open scroll, on which is often the inscriptionLex Domini (Law of the Lord) orDominus legem dat (The Lord gives the law). In the mausoleum of Constantina atRome (S. Costanza, in the Via Nomentana) this scene is given as a pendant to the delivery of theLaw toMoses. In representations on fifth-century sarcophagi theLord presents to Peter (instead of the scroll) thekeys. In carvings of the fourth century Peter often bears a staff in his hand (after the fifth century, a cross with a long shaft, carried by theApostle on his shoulder), as a kind of sceptre indicative of Peter's office. From the end of the sixth century this is replaced by thekeys (usually two, but sometimes three), which henceforth became the attribute of Peter. Even the renowned and greatlyvenerated bronzestatue in St. Peter's possesses them; this, the best-known representation of theApostle, dates from the last period ofChristian antiquity (Grisar, "Analecta romana", I,Rome, 1899, 627 sqq.).
Sources
BIRKSStudies of the Life and character of St. Peter (LONDON, 1887), TAYLOR,Peter the Apostle, new ed. by BURNET AND ISBISTER (London, 1900); BARNES,St. Peter in Rome and his Tomb on the Vatican Hill (London, 1900): LIGHTFOOT,Apostolic Fathers, 2nd ed., pt. 1, VII. (London, 1890), 481sq.,St. Peter in Rome; FOUARDLes origines de l'Église: St. Pierre et Les premières années du christianisme (3rd ed., Paris 1893); FILLION,Saint Pierre (2nd ed Paris, 1906); collectionLes Saints; RAMBAUD,Histoire de St. Pierre apôtre (Bordeaux, 1900); GUIRAUD,La venue de St Pierre à Rome in Questions d'hist. et d'archéol. chrét. (Paris, 1906); FOGGINI,De romano D. Petr; itinere et episcopatu (Florence, 1741); RINIERI,S. Pietro in Roma ed i primi papi secundo i piu vetusti cataloghi della chiesa Romana (Turin, 1909); PAGANI,Il cristianesimo in Roma prima dei gloriosi apostoli Pietro a Paolo, e sulle diverse venute de' principi degli apostoli in Roma (Rome, 1906); POLIDORI,Apostolato di S. Pietro in Roma in Civiltà Cattolica, series 18, IX (Rome, 1903), 141 sq.; MARUCCHI,Le memorie degli apostoli Pietro e Paolo in Roma (2nd ed., Rome, 1903); LECLER,De Romano S. Petri episcopatu (Louvain, 1888); SCHMID,Petrus in Rome oder Aufenthalt, Episkopat und Tod in Rom (Breslau, 1889); KNELLER,St. Petrus, Bischof von Rom in Zeitschrift f. kath. Theol., XXVI (1902), 33 sq., 225sq.; MARQUARDT,Simon Petrus als Mittel und Ausgangspunkt der christlichen Urkirche (Kempten, 1906); GRISAR,Le tombe apostoliche al Vaticano ed alla via Ostiense in Analecta Romana, I (Rome, 1899), sq.
About this page
APA citation.Kirsch, J.P.(1911).St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles. InThe Catholic Encyclopedia.New York: Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm
MLA citation.Kirsch, Johann Peter."St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles."The Catholic Encyclopedia.Vol. 11.New York: Robert Appleton Company,1911.<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm>.
Transcription.This article was transcribed for New Advent by Gerard Haffner.
Ecclesiastical approbation.Nihil Obstat. February 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor.Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is webmasterat newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can't reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.
