Of the incidents during the ministry in which Peter played a prominent part it is only possible here to deal with one in detail. Critics attach considerable importance to the account of Peter's confession at Caesarea Philippi (Mark viii. 27 sqq., Matt. xvi. 13 sqq., Luke ix. 18 sqq.). According to all three synoptic gospels, at a comparatively late date in the history of the ministry Peter, in answer to a question of Jesus, acknowledged him to be the Messiah. Jesus then spoke of his coming passion, and Mark and Matthew add that Peter brought upon himself a severe rebuke by protesting against such an unwelcome development. The gospels make it clear that this was a turning-point in the his tory of the ministry and in the education of the Twelve. Matthew emphasizes the importance of the occasion by the insertion of a remarkable paragraph concerning Peter. "And Jesus answered him, Blessed art thou Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to thee, but my Father in Heaven. And I say to thee that thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church, and gates of Hades will not prevail against it. I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in the heavens, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in the heavens." Here diffi culties multiply, but two points seem clear. (I) Peter is to have unique importance in the future corresponding to the unique in sight which he has displayed ; he is the rock on which a new ecclesia will be founded to triumph over death. (2) Peter will have unique authority to admit to the new ecclesia and to legislate for its members. We must consider these points in greater detail. (I) Peter has received a definite revelation from Heaven, and his confession does not reflect the opinion of men (cf. Gal. i. 16). In virtue of this insight he is to become the foundation of "my church," that is, of an ecclesia comparable with the old Israel which is frequently referred to in the Old Testament as "the con gregation" (Heb. '71m LXX.
C. Taylor (Sayings of the Jewish Fathers) quotes a remarkable rabbinic parallel: When the Holy One wanted to create the world, he passed over the generations of Enoch and of the flood as unsound; but when he saw Abraham who was going to arise he said, Lo I have discovered a rock (petra) to build and to found the world upon. Therefore he called Abraham "rock" ( ), as it
is said, "Look unto the rock whence ye are hewn." In what sense Peter is to be the foundation of the new ecclesia is perhaps explained in the following words : "Peter will bear witness to the resurrection, and against the Church thus encouraged to face death the gates of Hades (Death, not Hell) will not prevail." (2) Peter will receive the keys of the kingdom and will have unquestioned authority to bind and to loose, that is to legislate for the community. As to the keys, Is. xxii. 20-23 should be studied, and, for a Christian parallel, Rev. iii. 7. Two ideas seem to be combined : a chief steward bears the keys of a house as the sign of his authority, and a teacher of truth has the means of admission. to the kingdom of Heaven (cf. Luke xi. 52 where the lawyers are blamed for taking away the key of knowledge). St. Peter will have authority in the new church such as Eliakim had in the old ; and, as the ideal Scribe, St. Peter will admit many to the kingdom by his teaching. It is remarkable that in Matt. xviii. 18 a similar power of binding and loosing is bestowed upon all the disciples. (B. T. D. Smith, St. Matthew, pp. 151, sqq.) Opinions differ as to the authenticity of this saying addressed to Peter. The use of ecclesia for the Christian Church as a whole seems to reflect later usage (cf. Matt. xviii. 17 where the word means a local congregation) ; and the whole passage implies a reverence for St. Peter such as might be felt by the second gen eration of Christians, especially by some community (? the Church of Antioch) which regarded him as its founder. John vi. 68 records another confession of Peter which is perhaps the Johan nine equivalent of the synoptic "Thou art the Christ." St. Peter and the Resurrection.—The New Testament im plies that St. Peter was specially famous in the early church as a witness to the resurrection of Jesus. St. Paul (I. Cor. xv. 5) mentions an appearance to Cephas first among the evidences of the resurrection. The "young man" of Mark xvi. thus instructs the women at the tomb, "Go tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee and there ye shall see him"; from which we may infer that Mark intended to relate an appearance in Galilee at which Peter was specially prominent. Luke testifies to a belief in an early appearance to Simon (xxiv. 34), although he does not describe it and it does not fit easily into his scheme. It is very strange that the description of this appearance has dropped out of the synoptic tradition, for it seems to have be longed to a very early stratum. The omission may be variously explained. The original ending of Mark is almost certainly lost. Luke and John adopted the belief that the disciples stayed in Jerusalem after the crucifixion, and both were therefore bound to omit a story of an early appearance in Galilee. Matthew seems to have deliberately preferred an account of an appearance to all the disciples on a mountain, perhaps because he thought it evi dentially superior. But it is very probable that the appendix to St. John (ch. xxi.) reproduces a late version of the half-forgotten story ; and, so far as we can judge, the apocryphal gospel of Peter ended with a similar account. In the Johannine narrative Jesus appears to seven disciples, and Peter is prominent. The apocryphal account begins, "And I Simon Peter. . . ." It has been suggested that the story of Jesus' walking on the water (Mark vi. 48 and parls.) is another version of the same incident, for Matthew rep resents Peter as acting in a similar way on that occasion, jumping out of the boat to meet Jesus. (Matt. xiv. 29, cf. Joh. xxi. 7.) Later History and Death.—The last chapter of the fourth gospel is important as containing what is certainly the earliest reference to the death of St. Peter. Three times Jesus tests his love which three times he had denied, and three times entrusts to him the pastoral duty to "feed my sheep." The sheep (or lambs, v. 15) are doubtless members of the early Church dependent upon Peter's teaching for their spiritual food. So we have a further testimony to the Apostle's great reputation as a teacher, and a suggestion that his life was devoted to pastoral rather than to mis sionary work. The reference to his death is to us obscure, though probably it was clear enough to the original readers of the gospel. "Verily verily I say unto thee, when thou wast young thou didst gird thyself and walkedst whither thou wouldest ; but when thou shalt be old thou shalt stretch forth thy hands and another shall gird thee, and bear thee whither thou wouldest not. Now this he
spake signifying by what manner of death he should glorify God." The inference seems to be that the life of St. Peter was prolonged to an age at which he was unable any longer to attend to himself, that he lived under some kind of restraint, and that his death was somehow connected with these circumstances. To the Church it was a martyrdom by which he glorified God, but the words do not necessarily imply more than that Peter died of old age, bearing bravely its infirmities and indignities. Clement of Rome (Ep. 5
perhaps implies more than this, but the tradition that Peter was crucified rests upon a misunderstanding of the words "thou shalt stretch forth thy hands" (i.e., to allow another to gird thee), and has nothing but a respectable antiquity (Tertullian and Origen) to commend it.
The first part of the Acts is largely a record of Peter's doings, and from these chapters it appears that for some time of ter the Ascension he was the acknowledged head of the Jerusalem church. His prominence brought him into collision with the Jewish authorities, and twice he was arrested by the priests (iv. 3, v. 18, possibly a doublet). Accompanied by John he made a journey to Samaria to see the results of Philip's preaching, and thus he was concerned in the earliest expansion of the Church (viii.
ff.). At a later date he travelled further afield, visiting Lydda, Joppa and Caesarea. At Caesarea he baptized Cornelius, and thus it was Peter who admitted the first Gentile to the Church, though Cornelius was no heathen (x. 1 ff.). Returning to Jerusalem Peter met criticisms of his policy by relating his experiences, and he was successful in convincing his critics; but it must not be assumed that either St. Peter or the other authorities had as yet any idea of dispensing with circumcision as generally necessary to salvation. There followed (at what interval we do not know) a persecution by Herod in which Peter was arrested, and a famine in which the Jerusalem church, weakened economically by socialistic experi ments, suffered severely.
The famine probably continued after Herod's death, and Peter may have been present throughout, for "another place" to which he departed (xii. 17) may mean no more than another house. If he was present during the famine he must have met Saul and Barnabas when they brought relief from Antioch (xi. 3o), and this may be the meeting described in Gal. ii. 1 ff. at which an agreement was reached between Paul and the senior Apostles on the question of preaching to the Gentiles. This is the view of Sir William Ramsay, and it has the great advantage that it acquits St. Paul of the charge that in writing to the Galatians he omitted to mention one of his visits to Jerusalem.
Peter's last appearance in Acts is in connection with the Council of Jerusalem where he stands up to champion a liberal policy towards the Gentiles. The veracity of the author of Acts has been questioned here, for in Gal. ii. 11 St. Paul discloses the fact that even after the agreement reached at Jerusalem Peter vacil lated in his policy towards the Gentiles. If the encounter at Antioch took place after the Council at Jerusalem of Acts xv. then Peter's weakness is as hard to understand as is the obstinacy of the Jewish party. But if Ramsay's view be accepted it is much easier to reconstruct the history of events. At an informal con ference in Jerusalem Peter and other leaders were persuaded to sanction an approach to the Gentiles, but not all the Jerusalem party consented nor indeed had they been consulted. The exact terms on which Gentiles might be admitted were not decided. Later, at Antioch, Peter encountered strong conservative oppo sition and began to waver, but at the subsequent council at Jeru salem he recovered courage enough to state his own convictions, the Jewish party were compelled to bow to the logic of facts, and the whole question was settled. Such a course of events is not inconsistent with what we know of St. Peter's character.
There are one or two hints in the New Testament as to St. Peter's later history. I. Cor. i. 12 mentions a party of Cephas at Corinth, and some have supposed that this implies a residence of St. Peter at Corinth as a consequence of which a party of his admirers was formed. But this is by no means certain, and the evidence of Dionysius of Corinth (c. 17o) is too late to give sub stantial support to the belief.
If the first Epistle of Peter be genuine—and to some extent even if it be not—it furnishes some information about the Apos tle's subsequent activities. It may suggest a ministry in Asia Minor (i. I), and it implies a residence in "Babylon." Babylon has been very commonly taken to mean Rome (Rev. xvi. 19, xvii. 5, etc.), and, if so, we have very early evidence of St. Peter's resi dence in the capital of the Empire. The belief that Peter lived in Rome goes back to Irenaeus (3 I. i.), Clement of Alexandria (Comment. on I. Peter), and Tertullian ( Scorp. 5). Some hold that it is implied by Clement of Rome who couples the names of Peter and Paul as "champions nearest to us" (I. Ep. v.), and by Ignatius who says to the Romans, "I do not command you as Peter and Paul" (ad. Rom. iv).
Irenaeus states that Mark acted as Peter's assistant in Rome, and this tradition receives support from I. Pet. v. 14 and from Papias (Euseb. H.E. iii. 39, 5).
Thus the evidence that St. Peter was at Rome is strong though not conclusive.
Early tradition (Origen, Clementines, Eusebius, Apostolic Con stitutions and Jerome) also connects Peter with Antioch of which church he was said to have been the first bishop. Whether this belief was more than an inference from Gal. ii. II we do not know.
Nothing definite is known about the Apostle's death. Tertullian states that he was crucified under Nero, and Origen adds that at his own request he was crucified head downwards. But this testi mony is late, and we have seen that Joh. xxi. suggests rather that Peter's sufferings were those of old age and restraint upon his liberty. Clement's reference to Peter's fate is very vague. If the Apostle was the author of I. Peter it is almost certain that he lived to a later date than the reign of Nero (see PETER, FIRST EPISTLE OF). Early in the third century the grave of Peter and Paul was shown in the Vatican (Euseb. H.E. 2. 25, Acta Petri 84), and the relics were moved to the catacombs in A.D. 258. Whether or not they were genuine we have no means of judging.
BIBLIoGRAPHY.-Chase art. "Peter" in Hastings Dictionary of the Bible; Harnack, Chronologie; Schmiedel, art. "Simon Peter" in Encyclop. Biblica; Foakes-Jackson, St. Peter, Prince of Apostles; Duchesne, Liber Pontificalis; Lipsius, Die Apokr. Apostelgesch.