Commentary Upon Acts, Part 7
ACTS. Chap. XI.
Vers. 28. Great dearth throughout all the World; which came to passe in the dayes of Claudius Caesar.
THat this famine was in the second of Claudius, wee have shewed before, not onelyonly out of Dion the Roman Historian, but even by necessary collection from other things. Now whether it proceeded from want of Raine, or from what other cause, it is not determinable: it appeareth by Sutton, that it came to this height through a continued sterility of the ground, which it seemeth had beene some yeares together. This yeare was Helena the Queene of the Adiabeni, present at Ierusalem, and her presence there was a happinesse to the City, for from Cyprus and Alexandria, shee sent for Provisions, and distributed them among the people, when divers had perished of famine before.
Vers. 30. Sent it to the Elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.
Sect. Pauls rapture into the third Heaven.
Although it bee not mentioned in this Chapter that Paul went up to Ierusalem, but was sent onelyonly with provisions to the poore brethren in Iudea: yet have wee also proved before, that at this journey hee had his trance in the Temple, Acts 22.17. and in that trance he was rapt up into the third Heaven. The story of which hee himselfe relateth, 2. Cor. 12.2. I knew a man in Christ above fourteen yeares agoe, whether in the body I cannot tell, &c. And there hee relateth also the story of the messenger of Satan, buffeting him, and himselfe praying, and God giving him a gracious answer: all which wee shall explaine, by Gods permission, in another place.
In this trance God bids him get out of Ierusalem, and gives him commission to goe preach among the Gentile…, Acts 22.18, 21. And so he returneth from Ierusalem to Antioch, where wee shall have him the next yeare.
Sect. II. Peter not this yeare at Rome.
This yeare the Romanists have brought Peter to Rome, and made this the first yeare or beginning of his Episcopacy there. For thus Baronius, That Peter came to Rome this second yeare of Claudius the Emperour, it is the common Opinion of all men. And to this purpose he alledgeth Eusebius his Chronicle, and Ierome de scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, and concludeth that others have written the same things concerning the time, that there can bee no doubt left of it.
It may be tolerated to insist a little the more largely upon the examination of this opinion, not for that it is of any such great import in its owne nature, as for that it is made of so great by them for their owne advantage. For were it granted that Peter was Bishop of Rome, and that he went thither in this yeare, yet what great matter were there in this, in common sense and reason? But because unreasonable men have from hence, or upon this foundation built the supremacy of the Pope, the great delusion of the world, let the same common sense and reason equally and impartially judge of the probability or improbability of this thing, in these two parts into which this tenet doth fall of it self.
1. Whether it be probable that Peter was Bishop of Rome at all.
2. Whether it bee possible that hee could come thither this yeare according as they themselves have laid his progresse, and that hee should set up an Episcopacy there.
Weigh the first by these;
First, Peter was Minister of the Circumcision, why then should hee goe settle himselfe to live and dye among the uncircumcised? Hee might indeed have preached to the uncircumcised as hee travailed up and downe, as Paul did to the circumcised, being the Minister of the uncircumcision, but to take up his abode and residence, and thereto settle, to live and die among them; was a thing neither probable in the eyes of other men, nor justifiable in him himself.
Secondly, if Peter were at Rome in the sense and extent that the Romanists will have it, then hath the Scripture omitted one of the greatest points of salvation that belongeth to Christianity: For how many maine points of faith hath Popery drawne out of this one conclusion, that Peter was Bishop of Rome; as the Primacy of the Pope, the infallibility of his Chaire, his absolute power of binding and loosing, no salvation out of the Church of Rome, and divers other things, which all hang upon the Pin forenamed: And it is utterly incredible; 1. That the holy Ghost that wrote the Scriptures for mans salvation, should not expresse or mention a thing that containeth so many points of salvation. 2. That Luke that undertooke to write the Acts of the Apostles, should omit this one act of Peter, which is made of more consequence then all the actions of all the Apostles beside. It is above all beleef, that he that would tell of Philips being at Az… tus, and going to Caesarea, chap. 8.40. Sauls going to Tarsus, ch. 9.30. And Barnabas his going thither to him, and divers other things of smal import, in comparison, should omit the greatest & most matteriall, & of the infinitest import that ever mortall mans journey was (for to that height is the journey of Peter to Rome now come) if there had ever been such a thing at all.
Thirdly, it is as incredible, that Paul sending salutation… to so many in Rome, and againe from so many there, should omit to have named Peter at one time or other if hee had been there. What was become of Peter in these reciprocall kindnesses and salutations of the Saints one to another; was hee a sleep, or was hee sullen, or what shall we make of him, or was hee not indeed at Rome at all?
But not to insist upon this question whether Peter were at Rome at all, which hath been proved negatively by many Authors, and by many undeniable Arguments; let us looke a little upon this foundation of his being there, which hath been laid, namely, his comming thither this year, which is the second thing to be taken into consideration.
And about this point, there have been divers simple Ignoramusses in former time, who so they held this first Article of the Roman Creed, That Peter was Bishop of Rome five and twenty years, and dyed in the last year of Nero, and so beleeved as the Church beleeved, they never cared to bring the head and heels together, or to observe how the times agreed, but have easily swallowed this camell of senselesse computation, that Peter went from the Councell of Ierusalem, Acts 15. to Rome, and there sate Bishop five and twenty yeares, which expired in the last of Nero; whereas, betwixt the Councell at Ierusalem, and the last of Nero there were but twenty yeares in all, if there were so many: But nimbler wits, that cannot bee caught in so plaine and apparent a trap as this, have found out a quainter and more curious date from which to begin the Chaire of Peter at Rome then this, and that is from the Story in the twelfth of the Acts of the Apostles. Where Peter being apprehended by Herod after his murder of Iames the great, and being delivered by an Angel, and having acquainted the Disciples with his delivery, they being together in Iohn Markes house, hee is said, to depart to another place: which they say, (and you must beleeve it, or they will take it very ill) was to Rome, and this was (say they) the second year of Claudius. A long journey beleeve it, to run to Rome, to avoid danger at Ierusalem: and Rome but a mad place to set up an Episcopacy in at this time, as hath been plaine in the preceding, and will bee also in the subsequent story of it. But that we may see, if not the impossibility, yet the utter improbability of that his journey in this second of Claudius, if that were the journey in the twelfth of the Acts, it will not bee impertinent to insert a story out of Iosephus concerning Agrippaes returne from Rome to Ierusalem, where hee slew Iames, and imprisoned Peter.