Chapter XXIII.—The Apostles Not Ignorant. The Heretical Pretence of St. Peter’s Imperfection Because He Was Rebuked by St. Paul. St. Peter Not Rebuked for Error in Teaching.

Now, with the view of branding241    Suggillandam. the apostles with some mark of ignorance, they put forth the case of Peter and them that were with him having been rebuked by Paul. “Something therefore,” they say, “was wanting in them.” (This they allege,) in order that they may from this construct that other position of theirs, that a fuller knowledge may possibly have afterwards come over (the apostles,) such as fell to the share of Paul when he rebuked those who preceded him. I may here say to those who reject The Acts of the Apostles: “It is first necessary that you show us who this Paul was,—both what he was before he was an apostle, and how he became an apostle,”—so very great is the use which they make of him in respect of other questions also. It is true that he tells us himself that he was a persecutor before he became an apostle,242    Gal. i. 13. still this is not enough for any man who examines before he believes, since even the Lord Himself did not bear witness of Himself.243    John v. 31. But let them believe without the Scriptures, if their object is to believe contrary to the Scriptures.244    Ut credunt contra Scripturas. Still they should show, from the circumstance which they allege of Peter’s being rebuked by Paul, that Paul added yet another form of the gospel besides that which Peter and the rest had previously set forth. But the fact is,245    Atquin. having been converted from a persecutor to a preacher, he is introduced as one of the brethren to brethren, by brethren—to them, indeed, by men who had put on faith from the apostles’ hands.  Afterwards, as he himself narrates, he “went up to Jerusalem for the purpose of seeing Peter,”246    Gal. i. 18. because of his office, no doubt,247    Scilicet. and by right of a common belief and preaching.  Now they certainly would not have been surprised at his having become a preacher instead of a persecutor, if his preaching were of something contrary; nor, moreover, would they have “glorified the Lord,”248    Gal. i. 24. because Paul had presented himself as an adversary to Him. They accordingly even gave him “the right hand of fellowship,”249    Gal. ii. 9. as a sign of their agreement with him, and arranged amongst themselves a distribution of office, not a diversity of gospel, so that they should severally preach not a different gospel, but (the same), to different persons,250    The same verse. [Note Peter’s restriction to Jews.] Peter to the circumcision, Paul to the Gentiles. Forasmuch, then, as Peter was rebuked because, after he had lived with the Gentiles, he proceeded to separate himself from their company out of respect for persons, the fault surely was one of conversation, not of preaching.251    Vers. 12, 13. See also Anti-Marcion, iv. 3 (Trans. p. 182). For it does not appear from this, that any other God than the Creator, or any other Christ than (the son) of Mary, or any other hope than the resurrection, was (by him) announced.

CAPUT XXIII.

In Petro enim non reprehensam ignorantiam aliquam a Paulo, sed conversationem.

Proponunt ergo ad suggillandam ignorantiam aliquam Apostolorum, quod Petrus, et qui cum eo, reprehensi sint a Paulo. Adeo, inquiunt, aliquid eis defuit; ut ex hoc etiam illud struant, potuisse postea pleniorem scientiam supervenire, qualis obvenerit 0035B Paulo reprehendendi antecessores. Possumus et hic Acta Apostolorum repudiantibus dicere: prius est uti ostendatis quis iste Paulus, et quid ante Apostolum, et quomodo Apostolus: quatenus et alias ad quaestiones plurimum eo utuntur. Neque enim, si ipse se apostolum de persecutore profitetur, sufficit unicuique examinate credenti; quando nec Dominus ipse de se testimonium dixerit. Sed credant sine Scripturis, ut credant adversus Scripturas; tamen doceant, ex eo quod allegant Petrum a Paulo reprehensum, aliam Evangelii formam a Paulo superductam, citra eam quam praemiserat Petrus et caeteri. Quin , demutatus in praedicatorem de persecutore, deducitur ad fratres a fratibus, ut unus ex fratribus, et ad illos ab illis qui ab Apostolis fidem 0035C induerant. Dehinc, sicut ipse enarrat, ascendit in Hierosolyma cognoscendi Petri caussa, ex officio et jure scilicet ejusdem fidei et praedicationis. Nam et illi non essent mirati de persecutore factum praedicatorem, si aliquid contrarium praedicaret; nec Dominum praeterea magnificassent, quia adversarius ejus Paulus obvenerat. Itaque et dexteramei dederunt, signum concordiae et convenientiae; et inter se distributionem officii ordinaverunt, non separationem Evangelii; nec ut aliud alter, sed ut aliis alter praedicarent, Petrus in Circumcisionem, Paulus in Nationes . Caeterum, si reprehensus est Petrus, quod cum convixisset ethnicis, postea se a convictu eorum se parabat personarum respectu; utique conversationis fuit vitium, non praedicationis. Non enim ex hoc alius Deus, quam Creator; et alius Christus, quam ex Maria, et alia spes quam resurrectio annuntiabatur.