ページの画像
PDF
ePub

ferent books, not only because of this paffage of Gelafius, but because the Periods or Travels never went under the name of Peter, but Clemens; whereas the Acts always did. But in this he is mistaken, the Travels being as expressly attributed to Peter, in the place now cited of Athanafius, as the Acts can be any where else; fo that, for ought I am able yet to fee to the contrary, thefe Acts of Peter, and the Travels of Peter, written by Clemens, were the same book; and fo being now extant, do not fall any farther under confideration here, but must be referred to their proper place in the next volume.

Numb. XLIX. The DOCTRINE of PETER.

TH

HIS has been clearly proved by Dr. Cave a and Dr. Grabe, to be the fame book with that intitled, The Preaching of Peter; and therefore fhall be confidered there, Numb. LII. and the place of Origen, where it is mentioned, produced.

TH

Numb. L. The GOSPEL of PETER.

HIS Apocryphal Gospel has been taken notice of by many of the antient writers, whofe accounts I fhall produce, according to my ufual method; i. e. the time in which they lived. It is mentioned,

1. By Serapion, in a treatise which he wrote concerning this Gofpel of Peter; of which we have the following account preferved by Eufebius c. Ἕτερός τε συντεταγμένῳ αὐτῷ λόγος περὶ τῇ λεγομένη xarà Пérgov Evαylexi, πεποίηται ἀπελέγχων τα ψευδῶς ἐν αὐτῷ εἰρημένα, διά τι

2 Hift. Liter. in Petro, p. 5.
b Lib, jam cit. tom, 1. p. 56.

There is another treatife of his, which he wrote concerning the Gospel, intitled, according to Peter, with defign

to confute fome false affertions in it, on account of

[blocks in formation]

νας ἐν τῇ κατὰ Ῥωσσὸν παρ- fome in the parifh of Rofus, οικία, προφάσει τῆς εἰρη- who, through the occafion μένης γραφῆς εἰς ἑτεροδόξως. of the faid Scripture, fell in

διδασκαλίας

ἀποκείλαντας.

Αφ' ἧς εὔλογον βραχείας παραθέσθαι λέξεις, δι ̓ ὧν ἂν εἶχε περὶ τα βιβλία γνώμην προτίθησιν, έτω γράφων. Ἡμεῖς γὰρ, ἀδελφοὶ, καὶ Πέτρον καὶ τὲς ἄλλες ἀποςίλες αποδεχόμεθα ως Χρισόν. Τὰ δὲ ὀνόματι αὐτῶν ψευδεπίγρα φα ὡς ἔμπειροι παραιτέμεθα, γινώσκοντες ὅτι τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐ παρελάβομεν. Ἐγὼ γὰς γενόμενα παρ' ὑμῖν, ὑπενόεν τὰς πάντας ὀρθῇ πίσει προσε φέρεσθαι, καὶ μὴ διελθὼν τὸ ὑπ' αὐτῶν προφερόμενον ὀνόματι Πέτρε Εὐαγγέλιον, εἶπον, ὅτι εἰ τᾶτό ἐσι μόνον τὸ δοκᾶν ὑμῖν παρέχειν μικροψυχίαν, ἀναγινωσκέσθω. Νῦν δὲ μας θῶν, ὅτι αἱρέσει τινὶ ὁ νᾶς αὐ τῶν ἐνεφώλευεν, ἐκ τῶν λεχ θέντων μοι, σπεδάσω πάλιν γενέσθαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς· ώςε, αδελφοί, προσδοκᾶτέ με ἐν τάχει. Ἡμεῖς δὲ, ἀδελφοί, καταλαβόμενοι ὁποίας ἦν αἱ ρέσεως ὁ Μαρκιανὸς, καὶ ἑαυ τῷ ἐναντιᾶτο, μὴ νοῶν ἃ ἐλά

to fome erroneous doctrines. It may not be improper to produce fome few paffages of it, in which he declares what his fentiments were of that book. He writes thus :

"We, brethren, do receive "Peter and the other Apof"tles even as Chrift; but "the fpurious pieces under "their names, as well know"ing them, we reject, having "good evidence that we have "received no fuch things. For « when I was among you,

[ocr errors]

I

supposed that all were be« lievers of the true doc« trine ; and fo not reading «Ε over the book which they "brought me, under the title "of the Gospel of Peter, I "faid, If this be the only oc"cafion of your contention, "let the book be read.

66

But

now perceiving, by what "I am told, that they had "Some fecret herefy in their "minds (viz. which they had

a mind to fupport by this « book), I will fpeedily make "another vifit to you. But "we, brethren, know what "the heresy of Marcianus is, "who is not confiftent with « himfelf, not underftanding

λεις

λει, ἃ μαθήσεσθε ἐξ ὧν ὑμῖν ἐγράφη. Εδυνήθημεν γάρ παρ ̓ ἄλλων τῶν ἀσκησάντων αὐτὸ τῦτο τὸ Εὐα[γέλιον, τετἔσι παρὰ τῶν διαδόχων τῶν καταρξαμένων αὐτε, ὃς Δοκη τὰς καλέμεν (τὰ γὰρ πλείονα φρονήματα ἐκείνων ἐςὶ τῆς δι δασκαλίας) χρησάμενοι παρ' αὐτῶν διελθεῖν, καὶ εὑρεῖν τὰ μὲν πλείονα τῇ ὀρθῶ λόγε τε ΣωτῆρΘ, τινὰ δὲ προσδιεςαλμένα, ἃ καὶ ὑπετάξαμεν ὑμῖν. Καὶ ταῦτα μὲν τῇ Σεραπίω

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]
[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

He places it among the books forged by the Hereticks under the Apoftles' names, not received nor cited by any Ecclefiaftical writer, but to be rejected as impious and abfurd. See the place

at large above, Chap. XXI. Numb. XXXIII.

5. By Jerome, in the Life of Peter.

Libri autem ejus, e quibus unus Actorum ejus infcribitur, alius Evangelii-inter Apocryphas Scripturas repu

tantur.

6. By the fame, in Alium de Evangelio, quod fub Petri nomine fertur, librum compofuit, ad Rhofenfem Cilicia Ecclefiam, quæ in hærefin ex ejus lectione di

verterat.

a Hift. Eccl. 1. 3. c. 3. Id. 1. 3. c. 25.

But those (other) books (called
Peter's), among which one is
his Acts, another his Gospel
—are reckoned among the
Apocryphal Scriptures.

the Life of Serapion.
He compofe also another
book, concerning the Gospel
which is carried about under
the name of Peter, infcribed to
the Church of Roffus in Ci-
licia, who by the reading of
that book had fallen into he-
refy.

Catal. vir. illuftr. in Petro. 4 Id. in Serap.

7. By Gelafius, in his Decree, according to fome editions.

Evangelia nomine Petri Apoftoli Apocrypha.

The Gospels under the name of Peter the Apostle are Apocryphal.

From these paffages it is not difficult to come to a determination concerning this book; only it seems neceffary first to observe, that though I have recited here the paffage of Tertullian, in which the Gospel of Mark appears formerly to have been called the Gofpel of Peter, yet it is by no means to be confounded with, or taken for the fame with the Apocryphal book now under confideration. I was obliged here to mention the paffage of Tertullian, because my design obliges me to produce every place where there is any fuch mention ; but it would be madness hence to infer, that these two books were the fame, feeing all the writers, who mention this Gofpel of Peter, have rejected it as fpurious, but every one of them agree in the receiving of St. Mark's Gospel as Canonical; which could never have happened, had they been the fame book. But not to leave the reader, who is unacquainted with these things, in the dark, as to the reafon of Mark's Gospel being called by the name of Peter, I obferve, that this was occafioned by the universally prevailing opinion among the first Chriftians, that St. Mark, being the companion of Peter, wrote the Gospel now extant under his name, from the mouth of Peter, or from what he heard him preach at Rome. This is attested by Papias, Irenæus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Jerome, and many others, as I have elsewhere obferved, and endeavoured to prove their tradition to be true in this matter, from fome internal evidences in the Gofpel. See my Vindication of St. Matthew's Gospel, against Mr. Whiston, Chap. VI. From all this it is plain, the Gospel of Peter, now under dif cuffion, was another book than that of St. Mark. By whom it was forged, is not very certain : Dr. Grabea, and after him Dr. Mill, fuppofe it to have been made by Leucius, whom

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
« 前へ次へ »