Jerome fays: " Peter (d) wrote two epiftles, called catholic: the fe cond of which is denied by many to be his, because of the difference of the ftile from the former."

And Origen before them, in his Commentaries upon the Gospel of St. Matthew, as cited by (e) Eufebius, fays: "Peter (f) on whom the "church is built, has left one epiftle [univerfally] acknowledged. Let "it be granted, that he also wrote a fecond. For it is doubted of."

What those learned writers of the third and fourth centuries fay of these two epiftles, we have found agreeable to the teftimonie of more ancient writers, whom we have confulted. For the firft epiftle feems to be referred to by (g) Clement of Rome. It is plainly referred to by (h) Polycarp feveral times. It is alfo referred to by the (i) Martyrs at Lyons. It was received by (k) Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch. It was quoted (1) by Papias. It is quoted in the remaining writings of (m) Irenæus, (n) Clement of Alexandria, and (0) Tertullian. Confequently, it was all along received. But we do not perceive the fecond epiftle to be quoted by (p) Papias, nor (9) by Irenæus, nor (r) Tertullian, nor (s) Cyprian.

However, both thefe epiftles were generally received in the fourth, and following centuries, by all Chriftians, except the Syrians. For they were received by Athanafius, Cyril of Jerufalem, the Council of Laodicea, Epiphanius, Jerome, Rufin, Auguftin, and others. As may be seen in the alphabetical table, in St. Peter, at the end of the twelfth volume, to which the reader is referred.

Such are the teftimonies of ancient writers concerning these two epiftles. If we confult the epiftles themselves, and endeavor to form a judgement by internal evidence; I fuppofe, it will appear very probable, that both are of the fame author. And it may feem fomewhat ftrange, that any of the ancients hesitated about it, who had the two epiftles before them. For with regard to fome of the most ancient writers, it may be fuppofed, that the fecond epiftle had not been feen by them, it not having come to their hands together with the first.

The first epiftle being allowed to be St. Peter's, we can argue in favour of the other alfo after this manner. It bears in the infcription the name of the fame Apoftle. For fo it begins: Simon Peter, a fervant, and an Apostle of Jefus Chrift. And in ch. i. 14. are thefe words: Knowing, that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jefus Chrift has fhewed me. The writer of this epiftle may have had a particular revelation concerning the time of his death, not long before writing this. But it is probable, that here is a reference to our Lord's predictions concerning St. Peter's death, and the manner of it, which are recorded in John xxi. 18. 19.

From

(1) Vol. i. p. 242. 250. 253.
(1) Vol. ii. p. 508.
(p) Vol. i. p. 250.

(r) Vol. ii. p. 617.... 622.

(k) Vol. ii. p. 434. and 447•
(m) Vol. i. p. 374.
(0) Vol. ii. p. 616.

(g) Vol. i. p. 374 375-381.
(s) Vol. iv. p. 829.

From ch. i. 16. 17. 18. it appears, that the writer was one of the difciples, who were with Jefus in the mount, when he was transfigured in a glorious manner. This certainly leads us to Peter, who was there, and whofe name the epiftle bears in the infcription.

Ch. iii. 1. This fecond epiftle, beloved, I now write unto you in both which I ftir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: plainly referring to the former epiftle, which has been always acknowledged for Peter's. These words are exprefs. But it might have been argued with fome degree of probability from ch. i. 12,.... 15. that he had before writto the fame perfons.

Once more, ch, iii. 15. 16. he calls Paul brother, and otherwise so fpeaks of him, and his epiftles, as must needs be reckoned most suitable to an Apoftle.

The writer therefore is the Apoftle Peter, whofe name the epistle bears in the infcription.

So that we are here led to that obfervation, which Wall placed at the head of his notes upon this fecond epiftle." It is, fays (1) he, a good "proof of the cautioufneffe of the ancient Chriftians in receiving any "book for canonical, that they not only rejected all thofe pieces forged "by heretics, under the names of Apottles: ... but alfo, if any good "book affirmed by fome men, or by fome churches, to have been writ"ten, and fent by fome Apoftle, were offered to them, they would not, «till fully fatisfied of the fact, receive it into their canon." He adds: "There is more hazard in denying this to be Peter's, than there is in "denying fome other books to be of that author, to whom they are by "tradition afcribed. For they, if they be not of that Apoltle, to whom they are imputed, yet may be of fome other Apoftle, or apoftolical But this author is either the Apoftle, or elfe by setting his 66 name, and by other circumftances, he does defignedly perfonate him. "Which no man of piety and truth would do." And then he concludes: "This epiftle being written by him but a little before his death, "ch. i. 14. and perhaps no more than one copy fent; it might be a good "while, before a number of copies, well attefted, came abroad to the "generality of the Chriftian churches."

man.

What has been juft faid is fufficient to confute the opinion advanced by Grotius, that (u) this fecond epiftle was writ by Simeon, Bishop of Jerufalem after James, the Lord's brother. Indeed that opinion cannot be admitted. It is deftitute of all authority from antiquity, and is inconfiftent with the whole tenour of the epiftle itself, or at leaft with many things in it. As has been well observed by (x) Vitringa, and has been now fhewn by us.

Jerome, in his article of St. Peter, in his book of Illuftrious Men, as already

(t) Critical Notes upon the N. T.p. 358. 359. (u) Scriptorem autem hujus epiftolæ arbitror effe Simeonem, Epifcopum poft Jacobi mortem Hierofolymis, ejufdemque Jacobi, cujus epiftolam habemus, fuccefforem et imitatorem, &c. Grot. in 2 ep. S. Petri.

() Verum quacumque etiam fpecie fe commendet conjectatio hæc Grotiana, hactenus animum inducere non potui, ut eam probem. Epiftola Petri pofterior talis eft, ut fcripta cenferi nequeat ab impoftore. Eft enim gravis, et fancto viro digniffima. Quod fi ita eft, certiffime Petro erit vindicanda,

quia

already feen, fays: "Peter (y) wrote two epiftles called catholic: the fecond of which was by many denied to be his, because of it's differing in ftile from the former." Of (z) this he speaks likewife in his epiftle to Hedibia. Bafnage (a) fays, he is not able to difcern fuch difference of ftile in the two epiftles. However, Dr. Sherlock, now Bishop of London, has largely treated of this point in his Differtation concerning the authority of the fecond epiftle of St. Peter. Who obferves, p. 203. " that the firft and third of the three chapters, into which the epiftle is now divided, agree in ftile with the first epistle. The only difference is in the fecond chapter, the file of which is no more like to that of the other, two, than it is to that of the first epistle. The occafion of this difference seems to be this, that in the fecond chapter there is a description of the falfe prophets and teachers, who infefted the Church, and perverted the doctrines of the gospel. Some ancient Jewish writer had left behind him a defcription of the falfe prophets of his own, or perhaps earlier times. Which description is applied both by St. Peter and St. Jude to the false teachers of their own times." It is added by his Lordship, p. 204. "St. Jerome fuppofed, and others have followed his opinion, that St. Peter made ufe of different interpreters, to exprefs his fenfe in his two epiftles. But had that been the cafe, the difference of ftile would have appeared in the whole, and not in one part of it only. Which is the prefent cafe. And I fee no reason to think, that St. Peter did not write both his epiftles himself."

That is the account, which his Lordship gives of the difference of the ftile. Which all will allow to be ingenious, whether they admit it to be right, or not. For fome may think, that (b) all this difference of ftile arifes from the fubject treated of in the fecond chapter.

I conclude therefore, that the two epiftles, generally afcribed to the Apostle Peter, are indeed his.

Mr. Oftervald, of Neufchatel, fpeaking of the first of these epiftles, fays: "It contains very weighty inftructions, and is one of the finest books of the New Teftament." Of the fecond he fays: "It is a most excellent epiftle, as well as the foregoing, and is writ with great ftrength and majesty."

Certainly,

quia præter præfationem, non temere rejiciendam, alia per hanc epistolam fparfa funt, quæ perfonam Petri nobis digito quafi monftrant, ut cap. i. 18. iii. 15. Vitring. Obfervat. Sacr. 1. 4. cap. 9. num. xlii.

(3) Scripfit duas epiftolas, quæ catholicæ nominantur: quarum fecunda. a plerifque ejus effe negatur, propter ftili cum priore diffonantiam. De V. i. cap. i.

(z) Habebat ergo Titum interpretem, ficut et beatus Petrus Marcum: cujus Evangelium Petro narrante, et illo fcribente, compofitum eft. Denique et duæ epiftolæ, quæ feruntur Petri, ftilo inter fe et charactere difcrepant, ftructurâque verborum. Ex quo intelligimus, pro neceffitate rerum diverfis cum ufum interpretibus. Ad Hedib. Qu. xi. T. 4. P. i. p. 183. al. ep. 150. (a) Nos ftili difcrimen deprehendere non poffumus. Neque continet alia quid, quod Apoftolo fit indignum. Bafnag. A. 63. num. iii.

(b) Concerning this fee more hereafter in the Remarks upon St. Jude's epifile. chap. xxi. near the end.

Certainly, thefe epiftles, and the difcourfes of Peter recorded in the Acts, together with the effects of them, are monuments of a divine infpiration, and of the fulfilment of the promife, which Christ made to him, when he faw him, and his brother Andrew employed in their trade, and cafting a net into the fea: Follow me, said he, and I will make you fisher's of men. Matt. iv. 18.

To whom fent.

II. Concerning the perfons, to whom thefe epiftles were fent, there have been different opinions among both ancients and moderns.

Eufebius (c) speaking of St. Peter's first epiftle, as universally acknow. ledged, fays: "It is infcribed by him to the Hebrews, fcattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Afia, and Bithynia." They who are defirous to know Jerome's opinion, may confider what is transcribed from him Vol. x. p. 130.... 133. For he does not seem to me to have any fettled judgement about the perfons, to whom Peter wrote. Didymus, of Alexandria, fuppofed, (d) St. Peter's first epiftle to have been fent to Jews fcattered abroad in feveral countreys. To the fame purpose Oecumenius, not only in his argument of the epiftle referred to by me (e) formerly, but also in his commentarie (f) upon the begining of the epistle.

Among the moderns not a few are of the fame opinion, as Beza and Grotius in their notes upon the first verfe of the first epiftle, and Mill (g) in his Prolegomena. Cave fays, St. Peter's (b) two epiftles were writ chiefly to Jewish Chriftians. Tillemont, fpeaking of the first epiftle, fays, it (i) is addreffed particularly to the converted Jews, in those countreys, but it fpeaks alfo to the Gentils, who had embraced the faith.

But though fome of the ancients, as juft feen, fay, that St. Peter wrote to the believers of the circumcifion, we have in the course of this work obferved divers others, who fay, he wrote to Gentils: as (k) the Author of the Calling of the Gentils, by fome fuppofed to be Profper of Aquitain: the (1) Author of the Divine Promises and Predictions: (m) Junilius. Caffiodorius in one place (n) fpeaks of Peter's writing to the Gentils, in another (o) to believing Jews. Auguftin has twice faid, that (p} Peter wrote to Gentils. In like manner another author (q) in a sermon joyned with his works, who may be fuppofed to have been his difciple. Gregorie the i. Bishop of Rome, expreffeth himself, as if he thought, that

(c) See Vol. viii. p. 103. (d) See Vol. ix. p. 173.

(e) Vol. xi. p. 414.

St.

(f) Τοῖς ἐκ περιτομῆς ὄντος ἐπιςέλλες, ὡς ὁ μακάριος ἰάκωβος· ἀλλ ̓ ἐκεῖνος αορίσως πᾶσι τοῖς ὑπὸ τὴν οικεμένην κατοικοῦσιν ἰεδαίοις ὁπεδήποτε ουσιν. Ουτος δὲ ἄφω ρισμένως τοῖς κλίμασι πόντε, κ. λ. Oecum. T. 2. p. 482. C. D.

(g) Num. 60.

Reliquit poft fe epiftolas duas, Judæis Chriftianis præcipue infcriptas. H. L. T. i. p. 5.

(i) Il l'addreffe particulierement aux Juifs convertis dans toutes ces provinces, quoiqu'elle parle auffi aux Gentils qui avoient embrassé la foy. S. Pierres art. 33. Mem. T. i.

(k) Vol. xi. p. 136.

(m) P. 297. 299.

(0) P. 313.

(9) The fame.

(1) P. 139.
(n) Vol. xi. p. 308.
(p) Vol. x. p. 248.

(r) St. Peter's epiftles were fent to all Chriftians in general, both Jews. and Gentils, in the countreys mentioned at the begining of the first epiftle. Bede, in his prologue to the feven catholic epiftles, largely cited by us formerly, fays, that () St. Peter's epiftles were fent to fuch as had been profelyted from Gentilifm to Judaifm, and after that were converted to the Chriftian Religion. He fpeaks again to the like purpose at the begining of his Expofition of St. Peter's first epiftle. But the Greek word, rendered by us frangers, is not equivalent to profelytes: as was obferved long ago by (s) Oecumenius upon the place, and fince by (t) Bafnage.

Mr. Wetstein argues from divers texts, that (u) the firft epiftle was fent to Gentils. Mr. Hallett in his learned Introduction to the epiftle to the Hebrews, obferves: "Some, fays he, go upon the fuppofition, that St. Peter's epiftles were written to Jews. But it seems to me abundantly more natural to fuppofe, that they were written to Gentil Chrif tians, if we confider many paflages of the epiftles themselves." (x) he proceeds to allege many paffages, and, in my opinion, very pertinently. Some of which will be alfo alleged by me by and by.

Where

Dr. Sykes (y) has lately declared himself in favour of the same sentiment, and argued well for it.

Mr. Bafnage fuppofed, that (z) St. Peter's epiftles were writ to Jews and Gentils, chiefly the former.

(r) Vol. xi. p. 353. 354.

(S) The fame. p. 388.

To

(ε) Σημαινει δὲ τὸ ὄνομα ου ταυτὸν τῷ προσηλυτῷ κ. λ. Oecum, Vol. 2ο βο 483. D.

...

p. (t) Fallitur egregie Beda. A qua fe fententia revocaffet, fi vocem a Petro adhibitam, iridos, attendiffet, quâ religionis profelytus numquam defignatur. Bafn. An. 57. n. iv.:

25.

p. 681.

(u) Ad eos, qui ex Gentibus electi funt, ut Chrifto et veritati obedirent. Cap. i. 8. 18. 21. 22. ii. 10. iv. 3. Wetflen. N. T. Tom. 2. (x) See his Introduction. p. 23. (y) "This epiftle of St. Peter, fays he, was writ to the ftrangers fcattered through feveral parts of the Leffer Afia. And it is plain, that he meant by them Gentils converted in thofe parts of the world to Christ. He does not mean Jews, but fuch as were elect, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father. Such, of whofe falvation the Prophets inquired, who prophefied of the grace that fhould come unto them, ch. i. ver. 10. fuch, for whom Chrift was manifefted in thefe last times. ver. 20. fuch as were λads eis weitóinoir, an acquired people, who had not obtained mercy: ch. ii. 9. 10. as Sheep going aftray, but now returned. ver. 25. as men, who in the time paft of their life had wrought the will of the Gentils. iv. 3. These are marks fufficient to defcribe the people, to whom St. Peter wrote.... The Gentils were now begotten in Chrift to a lively hope. They were become now what the Jews formerly were, a chofen genera tion, a royal priefthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people. &c." The Scripture doctrine of the Redemption of Man by Jefus Chrift. Ch. iii. feat. 252. p. 62. 63. See likewife ch. v. num. 832. p. 306. 307.

(2) Ut noftra fert opinio, ad utrofque fcripta eft, præcipue tamen ad Judæos, qui fub apoftolatum Petri ceciderant. Ad gentes quoque epiftolam fcriptam fuiffe, ex his explorate percipitur: Qui quondam eratis non populus, nunc eflis populus Dei. I ep. i. 10. Que Ethnicorum præcipue funt... Præterea Ethnicorum idololatria his perftringitur: Incefimus in nefariis idolorum cultibus. iv. 3. Bafn. ann. 57. num. iv.