11 PETER
Wieseler, Chronolorjie des Apostoliscken Zcitalters, p. 581.
% Peter's Domestic Circumstances. — Of the family and connections of our apostle we know but little. His father is named in the Gospel history, and his mother's name seems to have been Joanna (see Coteler, A d Const. Apostol. ii, G3). It appears from John xxi that he did not entirely give up his occupation as a fisherman on his entrance into the body of Christ's disciples. Luke iv, 38 and 1 Cor. ix, 5 seem to show that he was mar- ried, and so the Church fathers often affirm (comp. Co- teler. ad Clem. Recogn.xn, 25; Grabe, Ad Spirit. Patr. § i, p. 330). But the tradition of the name of his wife varies between Concordia and Perpetua (see Meyer, De Pi tri < 'onjugio, Yiteb. 1684). It is said that she suffered martyrdom before Peter (Clem. Alex. Strom, vii, p. 312). Some affirm that he left children {ibid, iii, p. 192 ; Euseb. iii, 30), among whom a daughter, Petronilla, is named (comp. A eta Sanct. 30 ; Mai, vii, 420 sq.). More recent- ly Ranch {Neues krit. Journ.f. Theol. viii, 401) strives to find a son of Peter mentioned in 1 Pet. v, 13, and Neander (Pflanz. ii, 520) follows him, supposing that the "elected together with you" (the word church in the English version is not in the original) refers to the wife of the apostle. The personal appearance of Peter at the time of his martyrdom is described in Ma- laise Chronogr. x, p. 256, in an absurd passage, of which the sense appears to be this: He was an old man, two thirds of a century old; bald in front, knob -haired (? KovSoSpiZ,), with gray hair and beard ; of clear com- plexion, somewhat pale, with dark eyes, a large beard, long nose, joined eyebrows, upright in posture ; intelli- gent, impulsive, and timid. Comp. the description in Niceph. //. E. ii, 37, p. 165; and Faggini, De Rom. P. Itin. Exerc. xx, p. 453 sq.
3. Peter's Prominence as a/i Apostle. — From such pas- sages as Matt, xvii, 1 ; Mark ix, 1 ; xiv, 33, there can be no doubt that Feter was among the most beloved of Christ's disciples ; and his eminence among the apostles depended partly on the fact that he had been one of the first of them, and partly on his own peculiar traits. Sometimes he speaks in the name of the twelve (Matt. xix, 27; Luke xii, 41). Sometimes he answers when questions are addressed to them all (Matt, xvi, 10 ; Mark viii, 29); sometimes Jesus addresses him in the place of all (Matt, xxvi 40). But that he passed, out of the circle of the apostles, as their representative, cannot be certainly inferred from Matt, xvii, 24, even if it be sup- posable in itself. This position of Peter becomes more decided after the ascension of Jesus, and perhaps in con- sequence of the saying in John xxi, 15 sq. Peter now becomes the organ of the company of apostles (Acts ii, 15; ii, 14 sq. ; iv, 8 sq. ; v, 27 sq.), his word is decisive (Acts xv, 7 sq.), and he is named with " the other apos- tles" (Acts ii, 37 ; v, 29. Comp. Chrysost. on John, Horn. Ixxxviii, p. 525). The early Protestant polemic divines should not have blinded themselves to this observation. (See Baumgarten, Polem. iii, 370 sq.) The case is a natural one, when we compare Peter's character with that of the other apostles, and contributes nothing at all to fixing the primacy in him, after the view of the Ro- man Church. It may even be granted that the custom of looking upon Peter as the chief of the apostles was the cause of his always having the first place in the company of apostles in the Church traditions. The old account that Peter alone of the apostles was bap- tized by Jesus himself agrees well with this view. (Comp. Coteler, Ad llerm. Past, iii, 16.)
As to the meaning of the passage Matt, xvi, 18, there is much dispute. The accounts which have been given of the precise import of this declaration may be summed up under these heads : 1. That our Lord spoke of himself, and not of Peter, as the rock on which the Church was to be founded. This inter- pretation expresses a great truth, but it is irreconcil- able with the context, and could scarcely have oc- curred to an unbiassed reader, and certainly does not
PETER
12
PETER
give the primary and literal meaning of our Lord's words. It has been defended, however, by candid and learned critics, as Glass and Dathe. 2. Thai our Lord addresses Peter as the type or representative of the Church, in his capacity of chief disciple. This is An- gUStine'8 view, and it was widely adopted in the early Church. It is hardly borne out by the context, and seems to involve a false metaphor. The Church would in that case be founded on itself in its type. 3. That the rock "as not the person of Peter, but his confession of faith. This rests mi much better authority, and is supported by stronger arguments. Our Lord's ques- tion was put to tin- disciples generally. Although the answer came through the mouth of Peter, always ready spokesman, it did not the less express the be- lief of the whole body. So in other passages (noted below) the apostles generally, not Peter by himself, are spoken of as foundations of the Church. Every one will acknowledge that Christ, as before suggested, is pre-eminently the first foundation. THE Pock, on which every true disciple. on which Peter himself, musl be built. It was by his faithful confession that be showed he was upon the rock. He was then Peter indeed, exhibiting that personal characteristic in the view of which Christ had long before given lum the name. Such an interpretation may seem to accord best with our Lord's address, " Thou art Peter"— the firm maintainor of essential truth, a truth by the faith- ful grasping of which men become Christ's real disci- ples, living stones of his Church (John xvii, 3; Rom. x, 9 ; 1 Cor. iii, 11). Thus it was not the personal rock Peter, but the material rock of Gospel truth, the adherence to which was the test of diseipleship. This view, that it was Peter's confession on which Christ would build his Church, has been held by many able expositors. Fur instance, Hilary says, "Super banc igitur confession is petram ecclesise sedificatio est" (Z)e Trin. lib. vi, 3(5, Op. [Par. 1693], col. 903 ; comp. lib. ii, 23, C 1. -<^l. See also Cyril of Alexandria (De Sanct. Tr'n'. dial. iv. (>]>. [Lut. 1638], torn, v, pars i, p. 507); Chrysostom | /» M^tt. hom. liv. Op. [Par. 1718- 38 |. vii, 548); and the writer under the name of Nyssen {Test, de .\<l n nt. Dom. adv. J ml. in Greg. Nyssen. Op. [Par. 1638 |, ii, 162). Yet it seems to have been originally Suggested as an explanation, rather than an interpre- tation, which it certainly is not in a literal sense. 4. Thai Peter himself was the rock on which the Church would be built, as the representative of the apo-tles. as professing in their name the true faith, and as intrusted specially with the duty of preaching it, and thereby laying the foundation of the Church. Many learned and candid Protestant divines have ac- quiesced in this view (e.g. Pearson, Hammond, Ben- gel, Rosenmuller, Schleusner, Kuinol, Bloomfield, etc.). It is borne out by the facts thai Peter on the day of Pentecost, and during the whole period of the establishment of the Church, was the chief agent in all the work of the ministry, in preaching, in admit- ting both .lews and Gentiles, and laying down the terms of communion. Ibis view is wholly incompat- ible with the Roman theory, which makes him the