alfo he fuppofeth, that (s) St. Peter died a martyr at Rome, in the year of Chrift 64. at the begining of Nero's perfecution. And indeed ́ex• preffeth himself with a great deal of affurance and pofitivenesse.

Jerome concludes his article of St. Peter, faying: "He (t) was bu ried at Rome in the Vatican, near the triumphal Way, and is in veneration all over the world." We likewife formerly (u) faw a paffage of Caius, about the year 212. where he speaks of the tombs of the two Apoftles, Peter and Paul, at Rome. And Chryfoftom, in a paffage lately cited, fuppofes St. Peter to have been buried in that city.

Things hitherto omitted.

VI. I fhall now take notice of a few things hitherto entirely omitted, or but flightly touched upon. His Epifcopate at Antioch, his having been five and twenty years Bishop of Rome, his children, his wife's martyrdom, said to have happened at Rome, the manner of his crucifixion.

1. We have seen several authors, who speak of Peter's having been at Antioch. Chryfoftom feems to have fuppofed, that (x) he was there a good while. This may be alfo implied in the paffage of Jerome before cited (y) from his Book of Illuftrious Men, where he speaks of Peter's epifcopate of Antioch. And in his Commentarie upon the epistle to the Galatians he fays, that (z) Peter was at firft Bishop of Antioch, and afterwards Bishop of Rome. Eufebius fpeaking of Ignatius, and his epistles, calls (a) him the fecond Bishop of Antioch after Peter. Jerome (b) calls Ignatus the third Bifhop after Peter. They both fuppofe Euodius, of whom (c) Eufebius fpeaks elsewhere, to have been the first Bishop of Antioch, or the first after Peter.

What real foundation there is for all this, is hard to fay: whether it be built entirely upon what St. Paul writes Gal. ii. 11. . . . 16. or whether there was fome other ground for it.

But, as before faid in the account above given of St. Peter's travels, I think, that St. Peter did not stay long at Antioch, the first time he was there, which is mentioned by St. Paul, but returned to Judea, and after fome time leaving that countrey, he went to Antioch again. Where he

might

(s) Tandem fub Nerone, forfan circa annum 63. Romam venit, fideles, quos ibi repperit, in ordinem redegit, ecclefiam conftituit, auxit, et mox fanguine fuo locupletavit. . . . . Obiit igitur fanctus Petrus anno Chrifti 64. Neronis 10. fub initium perfecutionis Neronianæ, ut in opere vernaculo, De Vitis Apoftolorum, latius differuimus. Etenim cum Nero ob grande illud fcelus, Romanæ Urbis incendium, in odium omnium veniffet, abolendo rumori, inquit Tacitus, crimen conjecit in Chriftianos, eofque hâc de cauffà quæfi tiffimis pœnis affecit. Quin hâc occafione rapti fint ad martyrium Apostoli, nemo, cui fanum finciput, dubitare poteft. Hift. Lit. de Petro. p. 5.

(1) See Vol. x. p. 131.

(x) See p. 427.

(u) Vol. iii. p. 23. (y) See before, p. 426. note (1). (2) Denique primum Epifcopum Antiochene ecclefiae Petrum fuiffe accepimus, et Romam exinde tranflatum, quod Lucas penitus omifit. Hieron. in ep. ad Gal. cap. 2. 11.... 13. T. 4. P. i. p. 244.

(a)

...

τῆς κατ' ἀντιόχειαν πέτρες διαδοχής δέυτερος τὴν ἐπισκοπῶν κεκληρω peśvoç. H. E. 1. 3. cap. 36. p. 106. D.

(b) Ignatius Antiochene ecclefiæ tertius poft Petrum Apoftolum Epifcopus. De V. I. cap. 16.

(c) H. E. l. 3. cap. 22.

might stay a while, and then go and preach in the countreys mentioned at the beginning of his firft epiftle, and then go to Rome.

2. It has been faid, that Peter was Bishop of Rome five and twenty years. This is faid by Jerome in (d) his book of Illuftrious Men, and (e) in his Chronicle, or his Latin edition of Eufebe's Greek Chronicle, or Chronicle Canon, as it is fometimes called: where (f) he added divers things not faid by Eufebius himself.

But this is inconfiftent with the hiftory in the Acts. Nor is it any where expressly faid by Eufebius, though, perhaps, it might be argued from fome things faid by him. How the origin of this notion is accounted for by (b) Pagi, and (i) Baluze, both Romanifts, may be feen in their own words, which I transcribe below. I refer likewise to (k) Bafnage, and (1) Dodwell. In all whom are good obfervations relating to this point.

Clement

(d) Poft epifcopatum Antiochenfis ecclefiæ, et prædicationem difperfionis eorum, qui de circumcifione crediderant in Ponto. . . . Romam pergit: ibique viginti quinque annis cathedram facerdotalem tenuit, ufque ad ultimum annum Neronis, id eft, decimum quartum. De V. I. cap. i.

(e) Petrus Apoftolus, quum primus Antiochenam ecclefiam fundaffet, Romam mittitur, ubi evangelium prædicans xxv. annis ejufdem urbis Epifcopus perfeverat. Chron. p. 160.

()... Ibid. xxv. annis ejufdem urbis epifcopus perfeverat.] Adjecta funt ab Hieronymo, et ab eodem repetuntur in Catalogo Scriptor. Ecc. Græca enim non habent. Ab Affumptione Domini, ad id tempus, quo Petrus conjectus fuit in vincula ab Herode Agrippa... Petrus,femper fuit in Palæstina, aut Syria. Herodes obiit quarto anno Claudii. Quomodo igitur anno fecundo Claudii profectus eft Romam? Quomodo viginti quinque annos Roma perfeveravit? Scaliger. Animadv. p. 189.

(b) Præftat hic Lactantii citati verba in medium afferre. Apoftoli per annos xxv. ufque ad principium Neroniani Imperii per omnes provincias et civitates Ecclefie fundamenta miferunt. Cumque Jam Nero imperaret, Petrus Romam advenit. .... Ex his viginti quinque annis, qui ad prædicationem omnium Apoftolorum ex æquo pertinent, orta videtur opinio de xxv. annis, qui vulgo tribuuntur S. Petro in fede Romanâ. Pagi. ann. 43. num. iii.

(i) Fortaffis ergo ex his viginti quinque annis, qui ad prædicationem omnium Apoftolorum æque pertinent, orta eft opinio de viginti quinque annis, quos quidam veteres, et innumerabile recentiorum agmen, fancto Petro apoftolo tribuunt in fede Romana. Sane licet fruftra et fupervacaneè a nonnullis negari putem adventum ejus ad urbem Romam, qui clariffimis veterum teftimoniis comprobatus eft, de tempore tamen multum ambigo, cum videam tot tantafque difficultates habere eorum fententiam, qui illum Ro mam veniffe volunt Claudio imperante, ut coacti fint duplicare profectionem ejus in urbem, et duplex item ejus cum Simone Mago certamen comminisci, primo quidem temporibus Claudií, dein principatu Neronis. Quæ res quam abfurda fit, cum id a nullo veterum proditum fit memoriæ literarum, pervident iftarum rerum periti. . . . Itaque fi fas effet recedere a vulgari, et in animis hominum infita opinione, ei Lactantianam lubenter præferrem; id eft, Petrum quidem Romæ prædicaffe evangelium facile concederem, non fub Tiberio Claudio, ut vulgo putant, fed fub Nerone Claydio. &c. Steph. Baluz. annot, ad libr. de M. P. cap. 2.

(k) Ann. 42. n. x. xi.

(1) Diff. Singularis. cap. iii. n. 1. p. 13.

• Clement of Alexandria () reckons Peter among thofe Apoftles, who had children. According to him, Philip was another. Epiphanius fays, that (n) Peter came to Chrift after he was married, and had children. Jerome, in his first book against Jovinian, takes notice, that (o) in the Circuits, probably meaning the Recognitions, mention was made both of Peter's wife and daughter. But, fays he, that is not a canonical book. And still we have a paffage in the Recognitions, where St. Peter's wife is mentioned: but, as (p) Cotelerius obferves, what was faid of Peter's daughter is wanting. Poffibly thefe things may illuftrate the words of Peter, recorded Matt. xix. 27. Behold, we have forfaken all, and followed thee. What fhall we have therefore? And indeed Origen, in his Commentarie upon St. Matthew fays: "It (7) feems, that Peter did not leave nets only, but also a house, and a wife, whofe mother the Lord healed of a fever, and, as may be fuppofed, children, and poffibly likewife fome fmall eftate."

4. Farther, Clement of Alexandria (r), cited alfo by (s) Eufebius, informs us: "It was faid, that the blefied Peter, feeing his wife led forth to death, rejoiced for the grace of God vouchfafed to him: and calling to her by name, exhorted, and comforted her, faying: Remember the Lord."

If time and place had been mentioned, it would have added to the credibility of the ftorie. However the might be at Rome, as we know Peter was. And if fo, fhe might fuffer about the fame time with him. For Nero's perfecution took in people of both fexes, and all conditions, as we know from the account given by Tacitus. And we learn from St. Paul, that Peter was attended by his wife in his travels. 1 Cor. ix. 5.

5. It is alfo faid, that " (t) St. Peter being imprisoned at Rome, or being in fome imminent danger of fuffering, the brethren there entreated him

to

(m) . . . ἢ καὶ ἀποςόλως αποδοκιμάζεσι; Πέτρος μὲν γὰρ καὶ φίλιππος ἐπαιδοποιή Clem. Strom. l. 3. p. 448. D. et ap. Eufeb. H. E. 1. 3. cap. 30.

(η) Μετὰ γὰρ τὸ γῆμαι, καὶ τέκνα κεκτῆσθαι, καὶ πενθεραν ἔχειν, συνέτυχε τῷ σωτήρι, ἐξ ἰυδαίων ορμώμενος. Har. 30. num. 22. p. 147. Β.

(0) Poffumus autem et de Petro dicere, quod habuerit focrum eo tempore quo credidit, et uxorem non habuerit: quamquam legatur in Ipédois et uxor ejus et filia. Sed nunc nobis de canore omne certamen eft. Contr. Jovin. l. 1. T. IV. P. 2. p. 168. in.

(p) Die autem pofterá fedens cum uxore Petri.] Teftatur Hieronymus contra Jovinianum fcribens, legi in Periodis et uxorem Petri et filiam. Ea igitur Circuituum pars, in quâ de Petri filiâ (Petronillam illam vocant) fermo erat, nunc defideratur. Uxorem autem memorant præterea Clem. A. Str. 7. ubi et martyrium illius refert verbis, quæ citantur ab Eufebio. iii. 30. Origines ad Matt. xix. 27. Epiphanius H. 30. n. 22. Hieronymus ep. 34. Coteler ad Recognit, l. 7. cap. 25.

(q) Örigen. in Matt. Tom. xv. p. 682. T. 3. Bened.

(r) H. E. 1. 3. cap. 30.

(5) Φασὶ γεν, τὸν μακάριον πέτρον θεασάμενον τὴν ἀυτῷ γυναῖκα αγομένην τὸν ἐπὶ θάνατον, ἐσθῆναι τῆς κλήσεως χάρινα ἐπιφωνῆσαι δὲ ἔν μάλα προτρεπτικώς καὶ παρακλητικῶς ἐξ ὀνόματος προσείποντα· Μέμνησο ὦ αυτη τα κυρία. Str. 7.

p. 736. B.

() Idem Petrus poftea, victo Simone, cum præcepta Dei populo feminaret, excitavit animos Gentilium: quibus eum quærentibus, Chriftiange anime

4

deprecate

to confult his fafety by flight, and to referve himself for farther fervice and usefulnesse. At length he was perfuaded, and went out in the dark night. But when he came to the gate, he faw Chrift entering into the city. Whereupon he faid: Lord, whither art thou going? Chrift an fwered, I am come hither to be crucified again. By which Peter appre hended himself to be reproved, and perceived, that Jefus fpake of his death, and that now he was to be crucified in his fervant. Accordingly Peter turned back, and gave fatisfaction to the brethren. And being foon after taken up, he was crucified."

This ftorie is in Ambrofe, Bishop of Milan, in the fourth centurie. Tillemont (u) has endeavoured to find some grounds for it, or references to it, in more ancient authors. But they are very obfcure, and doubtfull. Bafnage (x) has fome remarks upon it, which may be read by fuch as have leifure.

6. St. Peter's death, and the manner of it, we faw juft now in a paffage cited from (y) Origen, and likewife, that when he was to be crucified, he defired, it might be in that way. So likewife Jerome," that (z) he was crucified by order of Nero, and fo crowned with martyrdom, his head downward, and his feet lifted up, faying: He was unworthie to be crucified, as his mafter was." To the like purpose (a) Prudentius. Chryfoftom alfo feveral times speaks (b) of Peter's being crucified with his head downwards.

And

deprecatæ funt, ut paullifper cederet. Et quamvis effet cupidus paffionis, tamen contemplatione populi precantis inflexus eft. Rogabatur enim, ut ad inftituendum et confirmandum populum fe refervaret. Quid multa? Nocte muros egredi cœpit. Sed videns fibi in portâ Chriftum occurrere, urbemque ingredi, ait: Domine quo vadis? Refpondit Chriftus: Venio iterum cruci figi.... Intellexit ergo Petrus, quod iterum Chriftus crucifigendus effet in fervulo. Itaque fponte remeavit. Interrogantibus Chriftianis refponfum reddidit, ftatimque correptus, per crucem fuam honoravit Dominum Jefum. Ambr. Serm. contr. Aux. T. 2. p. 867. A. B. ed. Bened.

(u) S. Pierre. art. 35. et note 39. Mem. Tom. i.

(x) Ann. 65. num. xi.

(y) See p. 424.

(z) A quo et affixus cruci, martyrio coronatus eft, capite ad terram verso, et in fublime pedibus elevatis: afferens, fe indignum, qui fic crucifigeretur, ut Dominus fuus. De V. I. cap. i.

(a) Primum Petrum rapuit fententia, legibus Neronis,

Pendere juffum præminente ligno.

Ille tamen veritus celfæ decus æmulando mortis

Ambire tanti gloriam magiftri:

Exigit, ut pedibus merfum caput imprimant fupinis,

Quo fpectet imum ftipitem cerebro.

Περὶ σερ. cap. 12.

(b): ἅτε δὴ καὶ πλείονος λαβὼν δύναμιν καὶ μείζον τὸ θάρσος ὑπὶς αυτό απο θανεῖν, καὶ τῷ ἑαυτῷ κατὰ κεφαλῆς προσομιλῆσαι, κ. λ. Chr. in. Pr. Ag. hom. 4, T. 3. p. 93. E.

Παῦλος δὲ καὶ πέτρος ἐχὶ ὃς μὲν ἀποτμηθεὶς, ὃς δὲ ἀπ' ἐναντίας τῷ δεσπότῃ τῇ ταυτὲ τὴν τιμωρίαν διξάμενος, ὕτω μετέση τῆς παράσης ζωής; In Gen. hom. 66. T. 4. p. 630. 1.

Ο χρυσός εσαυρώθη ἔτος ἔμελλεν αποκεφαλίζεσθαι ὁ πέτρος κάτωθεν ανεσκολο icon. In 2 Tim. kom. 5. T. xi. p. 687. D.

And it is unquestioned, that (c) among the Romans fome were fo crucified, to add to their pain and ignominie. Nevertheless fome ancient writers, who speak of Peter's martyrdom by crucifixion, do (d) not take notice of that circumftance. Which has induced (e) Bafnage to difpute the truth of it. Allowing, that (ƒ) Peter was crucified in that manner, he thinks it not reasonable to fuppofe, it was at his own request. And it must be acknowledged, that his reafoning is plaufible.

It seems to me, that Peter might be crucified in that manner, and that it might be owing to the spite and malice of those, who put him to death. The faying, that it was at his own defire, may have been at first only the oratorical flight of fome man of more wit than judgement. But the thought was pleafing, and therefore has been followed by many.

That he was at

Rome, and fuffered
Martyrdom there.

VII. Some learned men have denied, that Peter Frederick Spanheim, and fome others. Mr. Bower ever was at Rome, as (g) Scaliger, (b) Salmafius, (i)

is much of the fame mind. His words are: "From (k) what has been hitherto faid every impartial judge muft conclude, that it is at beft very much to be doubted, whether St. Peter ever was at Rome." Nevertheless there have been many learned men among the Protestants, as well as Romanists, whofe impartiality was never queftioned, who have believed, and argued very well, that Peter was at Rome, and fuffered

(c) Vid. Bafnag. ann. 65. num. xiv.

(d) Ubi Petrus paffioni dominicæ adæquatur. Tertull. Pr. cap. 36. p. 245. Tunc Petrus ab altero cingitur, quum cruci adftingitur. Id. Scorp. cap. 15. p. 633. De Mort. Perfec.

cap. 2.

Petrum cruci adfixit, et Paulum interfecit.

(e) Ubi fupra. num. xiv.

&

(f) Conceffo, ut plures teftantur, fublimibus Petrum veftigiis affixum cruci, quin ex Prætoris mandato irrogatum hoc fupplicii, quo pereunti adderetur dolor et ludibrium, non credere non poffumus... Præpoftera fane et vana ea videtur effe modeftia, quam afcribunt Petro... Neque prifcorum aliquem martyrum, qui in crucem acti fuerunt, fimilis unquam inceffit humilitas... Præterea certo certius eft, atrocius eorum fuiffe fupplicium, qui inverfo, quam qui recto capite figebantur cruci... Martyris autem eft, imperatam fibi mortem perferre fortiter, non vero pofcere, ut intendantur a carnifice tormenta. Id. ib. num. xv.

(3) Quum igitur Petrus ad περιτομήν miffus efTet, videtur in διασπορά Α. ana periiffe, fi conjecture locus eft. Nam de ejus Romam adventu, sede 25. annorum, et fupremo capitis fupplicio, ibidem, nemo qui paullo humanior fuerit, credere poffet. Fof. Scal. annot. ad Joh. xviii. 31.

(b) De Petro vero a Nerone fublato non conftat. Si non poteft probari Romæ illam fuiffe unquam, quomodo ibi crucifixus? Putem ego cum Salmafio Babylone martyrium paffum effe, fi quid divinare in re incerta licet. Galleus ad La. Inflit. l. 4. cap. 21. Vid. et de Salmafii fententid Pearfon. De Succeff. prim. Rom. Epifcop. Diff. i. cap. viii.

(i) Diff. de ficta profectione Petri Ap. in urbem Romam. Opp. Tom. 2. P. 331. &c. (k) Hiflory of the Popes. Vol. i. p. 5,