Daily national Republican. (Washington City [D.C.]) 1870-1872, 1870-01-22

We nave AlfoanV nuIu0lenNlN com mel teut Nneft
IL nothing, literally nothing, Belonging to the
ChFlhtlan writings OF the hrst century that
can be relied upon TO support the idea OF Pc
tet's western Journey There u no, hngie
enoe anywhere which mAkea the slightest al
fusion TO Peters being OF having been a.
Rome. The alleged passage from Linus, A.
edged forgeriep. The solepAaaags from Olem'
ent Of Rome, A, ID. 100, does mol contain the
temSte.t HAT that Peter ever len the Esot
came West when he suffered martyrdom. It
"a unneoessary, 1 presume, to explain that the
term "Esst,n A. then employed, meant the
| regions about the Tigriu and Euphfates, and
the term "wesp signiaed those parts Of Eu-
rope Of which the city Of Rome was the Pollt-
,ssl centre TIE passage from olsmoG, !, Da =,
guilty and to come to the most modern, let US
take the noble examples Of our own time. Let
Ss1S5s SJT sys; ne s1Sss ssSi' no.
one or two but many sutferings, and having
undergone His martyrdom he went 70 the
plass q gierJ that was due 70 him. Paul,
| and beeu hunted and stoned, received the
prize Of such endurAnee, for he was herald OF
the gospel u TIE West as well q. In the East
faith, In teaehinE, as he did, the whole world
| to be righteous, And when he oamo TO the
Temote.t llmits Of the West he underwent his
and thus freed from this world went TO his
own place, the most brilliant example Of
sassi ,S.I, that we who wo1la
bsIond doubt Pstsfs presence 10 Romei
Ahd get, a 4 be fact tAatAe wss ever there,
here was the very man, ahd M. the very
single alluslon he to be tortured out OF II.
| There 10 no such allullon IN the passage al
Al; The only remslninE dosunsht aIerLbed
that Peter was At Rome, Il the work We have
Already noticed, styled "Psteris ProolAmA.
tion.n, A. We have seen, iithsrs ever vas such
I a hNOE IL q M n - An naR 0har
sEtfaotI from u 10 which II 10 preisndSd that
there IL the slightest Allusion 10 Potsr's being
n Rome. element Of AlekAndriA, 10 the be-
quen,lJ 70 quote from II, and EusebiuI, who
wrote Ia the middle % the fourth ssafury, re.
gardsd y A. really the ptoduetion Of Peter, or
In A. d. asa, pronounced the whole thing apu-
Tious, btatinG that mona OF the extracts quoted
from = 6y Clement we're 70 DO found We
farther notice, with the single obleTyAtlon,
that the most that san be made OF II IL that
manussIipt called "Peter,s PtoslAmAtionn 10
aaid to have been oxtant In Rome dufing the
reign Of CiAudius, which manuscript IL alleged
to be forkery, and hAb disappeared from oxlat-
snee, nooody kaows hoy or when. And this
II put forth By some Romanlata as positive
there il to Do said about this il, haiti IL a
ssry .SHSs1isnl way q a5ias The ios.li'y Of
nan IL always to be supposed to be present in
Pofson 10 eyery place who're letters exist
torEed Win MS name, y would be easy to
guilty, AmountinE TO omnipressnee ltsslf,
SO much for the nrst century. Now, what
are the monuments Of the heeond century in
passage from IgnAtlus, Archbishop OF Antioch
A. ID. iot,. Addressing the Christians a. Rome,
hts words arei mot - Peter and PAul DO /
under Gentonse, They are frceI am stili 4
slave, But II ] suffeT the freedman Of Jssus,
also shall 30 Ialssd Up free 70 him" This e
Rome, 1t might ~ well be said that Antioch
Itself was Rome, There 10 also passage from
PAPiss RishoP Of HleroPoli., In PhTJslS, A.
aeen, hss great faeility 10 quoting words from
older writer's, which eAn be found nowhere but
s 81, on u, ~pTs rao lang
rsoOilsstioa o. What FstsS assS f 10 1sI, s az
aceurate but not systemstis account Of the |
hoard nor followed oar Lord, but subssansntiv.
a. have bsid, accompanied Peter, Who con. |
~ oooasion reQuited-not A. one, however,
Who was giving = consecutive history OF our
Lords disoourtes. SO that Marks Account Il |
soma Of the circumstances In the sane order |
10 which he remembered Peter to have told |
themi for he was careful not to omit or mia. |
SpoSiie,d AID EdSobius, who profsSSsd 10 |
PSpIAs says 81 Marx What shadow Of proof
AMefN u hlA NLlA NnOW tnMN Iater WAS Il
svsrl9 Rome 10 really more than any peroep- |
tion Of ours can detect. Then the few meAFFa |
frag nents Of the writings OF HSFAoleon All. |
evidence that Peter was a. Rome, not 6sesuss
they contain any statement to that effect hut |
because they DO NOT deny that he was there. |
up oae nonentity b. Anoiheri Thea We haTs |
q work called the "ReeoRni tions, y a1siFned by |
some Romanists TO the Beeond century, but |
evidently the production OF the middle area |
written In tho NtVlH of A hiaNnFiral
follow Simon MaEus, the!soresfer mentioned |
then going 90 to show that Instead OF eatfyiuI
out his intention, he only sent some re presen.
tAtiyes to Rome, while he himself Temained |
.GaiiS EslsIssS, and then y.ltloG LriPol be
10 undoubtedly notioh with the exception OF |
the one feature, which, so far as u goes, shows
that Peter never Visited Rome IN person for
Then We have another work called the |
"Olemenuna,n oollsetion Of sundry pieeeI |
century, profeIIlng 20 be q continued aooount |
Of what are called "The Acts OF ST. Peter,n |
But All thess writings are wholly unworthy Of
9ns e' being, a. one Ront'h writer Father
and idle stories.n Then we have a work, en-. |
titled "rhe Apostolic Institutions" asoriSed |
boon cited, as the strongest evidence IL con. |
talna, the following passages! Nov, concern
ing those bishops that have been ordAined 10
S HSs nf. sRs,s we @:k' h6GES gS5S sS
ordained BY me, Peter. and IgnatiuG By Paul.
or the Church OF Rome, Linus, the
sou o. CLAUDIA, ordained by Paul was the tirstj
aod after the eeath OF Lin u /, Clemsnt, ordained
By me, Peter, was the seeo6d. - These
are the bishops who ars entrusted BY ul with
ne parishes In he Lord The hsAding OF
The Holy Apostles selected Tor ofdsinedj Ger.
tain ones, ssndiao them forthip that IL, as
nom this passage Il that Peter must have
lion OF Clement which Il here spoken OF but
sISss he psrsons ofSslnsd By the spoSsiss
were also sent forth from thsmI And " being
mentioned came to Rome, II 10 evident that |
both Peter and Paul were yet 10 the East,
where these events tIansPired. And n we |
the year A. d. oB, as IL generally supposed,
then It would be Impossible Tor them 10 have
established either Linus or Clement 10 the
respeetiLs episeopates = namely, Que In the
year A. d. 70, and the other In the year A. ID.
100. And besides this, the abatement OF the |
second, after the death OF Linus, 10 the gov.
ernment Of the Clutch ct Rome, while other
authorities make AnAoletuh to be the second
and clement the third, and 90 confuse the SUE
For all these reasons It 10 evident that the
document We are considering 10 so fTauZht
TiS iMproe,S5il,ass as to es wholly uu,s-
dueed upon this question. The peKt passage
cited 10 found 10 the history OF Euaebtus, aud
processes to be quoted by him from Dtonysius,
bishop OF Oorinth, about A. u. ITO. The
Anesed extract 10 as folloWa! "By your recent
exhottAtion ye blend as 1t were the plant OF
the Romans and Corinthians, which was prop
AEAted BY Peter aud Paul, for II was not until
amer both these apostles had planted Us In this
Connth OF ours, a. well as In Italy, by Ad-
dressing their Instructions, both OF thsm, to
the same cities. that they were put 10 death
ior the faith, A. they were, about the same
time" The only point we need to rAise on
this passage 10 not concerning Its Authont.
city which 10 doubtful, but as 70 whether the
fact that Petor 10 mentioned with Paul as adj
dressing hisihHtTuotionG to the same cities,
shows necessarily thereby that Peter went 10
Rome 10 person. To AtnTm this IL irat 70 beg
the whole question, for II no one can "Ad-
dress Instructions" to the Inhabitants Of q
place, In any way but by word Of mouth and
BY bodily presence, then we may AZ well
abolish all written correspondence, and dis
Penae with any further use OF post olfiueH
and post roads," To what Absufditiea doeI
thil Romish fiction leAdt II 10 again pretended
that little work was written BY HeEesippus
about the year A. d. $50, which deIsffbeI
'tho learned dogan and "neFy ehATioW Of
Simon hAguG, at Rome, and which connects
the apostle Peter with the story, thus prov.
log that he was at ROmel hut the ,ghola |