appear that he still stayed in Rome, in spite of the imperial edict, and boldly preached the gospel, without reference to danger, until, soon after, it became necessary for him to go to the east on important business. The majority, however, are agreed that he did remove from Rome along with the rest of the Jews, though while he remained there, he is supposed to have kept up the apostolic dignity by preaching at all risks. His journey eastward is made out in rather a circuitous manner, probably for no better reason than to make their stories as long as possible; and therefore it is enough to say, that he is carried by the continuation of the fable, from Rome first into Africa, where he erected a church at Carthage, over which he ordained Crescens, one of his Roman disciples, as bishop. Proceeding next along the northern coast of the continent, he is brought to Alexandria, where, of course, he founds a church, leaving the evangelist Mark in it, as bishop; and passing up the Nile to Thebes, constitutes Rufus there, in the same capacity. Thence the fabulous chroniclers carry him at once to Jerusalem; and here ends this tedious string of details, the story being now resumed from the clear and honest record of the sacred historian, to the great refreshment of the writer as well as the reader, after dealing so long in what is utterly unalloyed falsehood.
Peter, bishop of Rome.—The great question of his having ever visited this city, has
two separate and distinct parts, resting on totally different grounds, since they refer
to two widely distant periods of time; but that part which refers to his early visit,
being connected with this portion of the history, I proceed in this place to the full
examination of all the evidences, which have ever been brought in support of both
divisions of this great subject in papal dogmatic history, from the supposed records
of this event in the writings of the early Christian Fathers. On this head, instead
of myself entering into a course of investigations among these writers, which my
very slight acquaintance with their works would make exceedingly laborious to me,
and probably very incomplete after all, I here avail myself of the learned and industrious
research of my friend, the Rev. Dr. Murdock, widely and honorably known
as the Translator and Annotator of Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History. Through his
kindness, I am allowed the free use of a long series of instructive lectures, formerly
delivered by him as a professor of Ecclesiastical History, which having been subsequently
modified to suit a popular audience, will bring the whole of this learned matter,
with the fullest details of the argument, in a form perfectly intelligible and acceptable
to my readers.
THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY FATHERS.
In the latter part of the first century, Clement, bishop of Rome, (Ep. I. ad
Corinth, § 5,) speaks of Paul and Peter as persecuted, and dying as martyrs.
But he does not say when, or where. In the middle of the second century,
Justin Martyr speaks of Simon Magus, his magic and his deification, at
Rome; but makes no mention of Peter's going to Rome, to combat him. Nor
does any other father, so far as I know, till after A. D. 300. About twenty
years after Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, (bishop of Lyons,) wrote his five books
against the heretics; in which he confutes them, by the testimony of those
churches which were said to have been founded immediately by the apostles.
The following extract from him will fully illustrate that mode of reasoning,
