The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1900-05-06

All the other books were propapv 49,
before IN. martyrdom occurred a -.
Grafton OF this fact reduces the arsuihen' :, ~.
alleged silence Of the New Tes'aire" -.
true value. especially II Il can he Sno"" :"
there IL a tolerably clear allision 10 ~ u"
tyrdom in each Of the two books wh'r'" "f'"'
II could be looked for M,
There are throe points to be proved 'n',
that 81. Peter was at Rome. Secohuas, "m"'
he was martyred by crucifxior. im'Ws,
that his crucifxion took place IN me 'V'n'
City. For all these assertions mere II "ou,-
dant evidence from sources on'slde =" Wv
Scriptures. Mr.. Barnes. however, "hu''-
takes to show that there il also certain "i'o""'
Of testimony bearing on each OF the 'nr'e pon,'
TO be found In the Bible itself, "h'n "9"-
mony. though II might scarcely he Su"'cen'
in itself to establish any NJ the ,hree "N'-
tons. is by no means without valne VINE" ~
is considered as Affirming what Is "".aus
known from other sources OF authorl'y' NAV
81. Peter was at Rome In the course OF MS minus
try is proved by the fact that ne o"'s
his first Epistle from that city under 'he h''ne
Of Babylon. That Babylon In TINS pace h'"s'
be taken to denote the Imperial cry, ara '"'-
not be referred either 10 the ancient bao!'o"
in Chaldea, or to the fortress ot 'ha' NAM"
in Egypt, is n matter ON when all schoia'S
are now agreed, and which may be taheh aS
settled beyond all controversy hhc'eh'
writer's were unanimous upon this point 'atho-
lie writers in all ages have taken inc same
view. and, of late years, oil other s'hoiaIs'
whether Protestant or rationalls'lc, nave 40
hered n il; so that il il now unlikely 'hat any
conspicuous student Of The subject VIII I"
ever again found 10 maintain the oIIosl'e
opinion on a point the Catholic and iraditloha'
Interpretation of which is held by such Ahgii-
cans as Iightfoot. Ellicott, Farrar. Westcot'
and Gore. and nv the Speakers Commentary
and also by Wieseler, Harnack. Hilgen-
field, Renan. Thiersch and Ewald. with
many others among the non-Cathoho
writer's Of the Continent, To he thoroughly
settled and outside the field OF contro-
varsy. Mr., Barnes makes but one quotation,
and that is from the Speakers Commentary,
wherein the debate upon the point is summed
up As follows. The foregoing arguments
seem TO leave us no alternative but 10 accept inc
old, unvarying testimony Of the Fathers. VINO
must have known the sense in which the state
mant was understood throughout Asia Minor,
the statement, namely. that st. Peter dcSiG-
mated Rome by the title of Babylon"
We come to tho second point. That 81. Peter
was put 10 death by crucitiXlon Is asserted
almost in so many words in the Gospel OF ~.
John. The Apostle is obviously speaking
of a fact known 10 all when he tells how JeSus'S
prophecy about 81. Peters death. the proph-
coy. namely. that his hands should be
stretched ont upon the cross. had been liter
ally fulfilled. This He said, s.gnifyinc the death
by which he Isl, Peter should g.orify God,
tSt. John xxi. lOL To stretch ont IN" hands
is used in this sense of crucifixion 10y heather
writer's. ard. no doubt, oven at the time when
they were uttered. and before their fulfilnent.
the words OF Jesus had been commonly UNDER
stood TO mean that 81, Peter would pass to his
reward by a death upon the cross. In The
Apocalypse also. there is a sentence which VI.
Renan interprets a. an allu>ion 10 81. Peters
crucifxion, In the judgmer; pronounced upon
heather Rome under The name Of Babylon.
occur the following word; Rejoice over her.
thou Heaven and ye holy apostles and prophets:
for God hath Judged your Judgment uIon her,
Apoc. xviii 20L Mr.. Barnes suggests that.
if the Apostles tor whose purder Rome was To
he judged were not -, Peter and 81. Paul, II II
difhcult 10 assign any Ineligible meaning To
the passage. This is all The evidence forthcoming
from SCRIPTURE and The author Of thl~ BOOK
docs not deny that it IS sCanty. though h" holds
il 10 be more explicit than a pripri We had a
right TO expect. SO far, ut least, a, III" martyr
dom of the Apostle * concerned. Turning 10
tradition, he finds the violence FIJI, and uni
form. Here again. the facts are summed
up by the speaker Commentary: The
tnet,mony Of early Christian writers is unvary-
ing. From whatever quarter their voices reach
us, they affirm that Babylon in l. st Peter was a
reoogniacd appellation Of P"mr. the city which
occupied the place of that ancient thHldean
metropolis a. the central world-power, aud
the headquarters Of autI-Chri,tian influences,
In fact. no other view Of the passage was ever
entertained before the time OF Calvin, Papla~,
Clement Of Alexandria. jerome. GcumrniuS
and t,iseDlus all state this IA "A weli-knOwn fact
needing no defence. ,foumenius gives The true
account Of the matter He calls Rome Baby
lon OH account Of the rreeminenCe which Of
old belonged d. To Babylon. In view of the una
nimity al the ~patristic evidence, Mr.. Barne-
deems il not surprising that there should he now
but few scholars willing TO attack is validity.
but that the marvel rather iS that there should
have been any so hardly sceptiral" n, Bishop
Eilicort has pat II, AS TO reject altogether eNi-
dcnce as strong. carly and wide az that on which
we believe that Hannibal invaded Italy"