IV.

Clement had probably not seen either Peter or Paul. His great practical

sense showed him that the salvation of the Christian Church demanded the

reconciliation of the two founders. Did he influence the author of the

Acts which represent to us this reconciliation as accomplished, and with

whom he seems to have had some intercourse, or did these two pious souls

spontaneously fall into accord on account of the bias which he had given

to Christian opinion? We are ignorant for want of proofs. One thing is

sure, the reconciliation of Peter and Paul was a Roman work. Rome had

two churches,--one coming from Peter, the other from Paul. Those

numerous converts who came to Jesus--some through the school of Peter,

and some through that of Paul--were tempted to exclaim, "What! Are

there, then, two Christs?" It was necessary to be able to reply, "No:

Peter and Paul understand each other perfectly: the Christianity of one

is the Christianity of the other." Perhaps (this is an ingenious

hypothesis of M. Strauss) a light cloud was introduced for this purpose

into the evangelical legend of the miraculous fishing. According to the

recital of Luke, the nets of Peter would not contain the multitudes of

fish which could easily have been taken; Peter was obliged to make a

sign to his co-workers to come to his aid. A second bark (Paul and his

friends) was filled as the first, and the fishing of the kingdom of God

was superabundant.

The life of the apostles begins to become obscure. All those who have

seen them have disappeared: most of them left no writings. One had

entire liberty to embroider on this virgin canvas still. Friends and

enemies profited by the unknown to set up arguments in support of their

theses, and to satisfy their hates. Towards the year 130, that is to say

about sixty-six years after the death of the apostles, a vast Ebionite

legend was produced at Rome, and designated by the title of the

preaching, or the travels, of Peter. The missions of the chief of the

apostles were recounted there, principally those along the coast of

Ph[oe]nicia; the conversions which he had made; above all, his struggles

against the great anti-Christ, Simon the Magician, who was at this epoch

the spectre of the Christian conscience. But frequently under this

abhorred name another person was concealed: it was the false apostle

Paul, the enemy of the law, the veritable destroyer of the Church. The

true Church was that at Jerusalem, presided over by James, the brother

of the Lord. No apostolate was of any value, if it could not show

letters emanating from this central college. Paul had none: therefore he

was an intruder. He was the "man enemy," who came behind to sow the

tares in the steps of the true sower. With what fury Peter gave the

denial to his impostures, to his false allegations of personal

revelations, his ascension to the third heaven, his, pretension of

knowing about Jesus some things which the hearers of the gospel had not

understood, the exaggerated manner in which he and his disciples

interpreted the divinity of Jesus!

These strange ideas of half ignorant sectaries would have been without

consequences outside of Rome; but every thing which related to Peter

assumed importance in the capital of the world. In spite of its

heresies, "The Preachings of Peter" had much interest for the orthodox.

The primacy of Peter was there proclaimed. St. Paul was thus injured;

but a few retouches extenuated what was shocking in these attacks.

Several attempts were made to diminish the peculiarities of the new

book, and adapt it to the Catholics. This mode of re-modelling books to

suit the sect to which one belonged was the order of the day. Little by

little the force of things was understood: all sensible men saw that

there was safety for the work of Jesus only in the perfect

reconciliation of the two heads of the Christian doctrine. Paul had,

even in the sixth century, some bitter enemies: he had always some

enthusiastic followers like Marcion. Outside of these obstinate men of

the right and left, there was a union of the moderate masses, who,

before their Christianism in one of the schools, fully recognized the

right of the other to be called Christian. James, the partisan of

absolute Judaism, was sacrificed, although he had been the true chief of

the circumcision. Peter, who was much less objectionable to the

disciples of Paul, was preferred before him. James retained no devoted

partisans outside of the Judæan-Christians.

It is difficult to say who gained the most in this reconciliation. The

concessions came principally from the side of Paul: all Paul's disciples

received the others without difficulty, while those of Peter repulsed

the followers of Paul. But concessions usually come from the strong. In

truth, each day confirmed Paul's victory.

Each Gentile convert weighted the balance on his side. Outside of Syria,

the Judæan-Christians were swallowed up by the wave of new converts. The

churches of Paul prospered: they had good judgment, solidity of mind,

and some pecuniary resources which the others had not. The Ebionite

churches, on the contrary, grew poorer each day. The money of the

churches of Paul was spent in the support of some glorious poor men, who

were unable to earn any thing, but who possessed the traditional life of

the primitive spirit. The elevated piety and severe manners of these

last were admired by the Christian communities of Pagan origin, who

imitated and assimilated themselves to these customs. It soon happened

that no distinction was manifest: the sweet and conciliatory spirit of

St. Luke and Clement Romanus prevailed. The compact of peace was sealed.

It was agreed that Peter had converted the first-fruits of the

Gentiles, that he had first absolved them from the yoke of the law. It

was admitted that Peter and Paul had been the two heads, the founders of

the Church of Rome; Peter and Paul became the halves of an inseparable

couple,--two luminaries, like the sun and moon. What one taught, the

other taught also. They had always been in accord: they had opposed the

same enemies, had been victims of Simon the Magician. At Rome they lived

like brothers; the Church of Rome was their common work. The supremacy

of this church was established for ages.

Thus, from the reconciliation of these parties, the settlement of these

primitive struggles, there came forth a grand unity,--the Catholic

Church, the Church of Peter and of Paul, a stranger to the rivalries

which had marked the first century.

It was, above all, the death of the two apostles which pre-occupied the

parties, and gave an opportunity for the most diverse combinations. The

tissue of tradition grew in this respect, by an instinctive travail,

almost as imperious as that which had presided at the construction of

the legend of Jesus. The end of the life of Peter and of Paul was

commanded _à priori_. It was maintained that Christ had predicted the

martyrdom of Peter, as he had announced the death of the sons of

Zebedee. The need was felt of associating in death the two persons who

had been reconciled by force. It was hoped, and perhaps this was not far

from right, that they died together, or at least as the consequence of

the same event. The places which were believed to have been sanctified

by this bloody drama were early fixed upon, and consecrated by

_memoriæ_. In each case, whatever the people desired came in the end to

be true. Tradition makes history, retrospectively, as it ought to have

been, and as it never is. Not long ago the portraits of Victor Emmanuel

and Pius IX. hung side by side in every frequented place in Italy; and

the people desired that these two men, who represented principles whose

reconciliation was generally considered necessary to Italy, should be in

reality completely united. If, in our time, such views impose themselves

on history, it will one day appear, in documents reputed to be serious,

that Victor Emmanuel and Pius IX. (probably Garibaldi will be added) met

each other secretly, understood and loved each other. During the middle

ages, at different times, similar attempts were made to appease the

hatreds of the Dominicans and Franciscans; to prove that the founders of

these two orders were two brothers living together in the most

affectionate intercourse; that at first their rules were the same; and

that St. Dominic girded himself with the cord of St. Francis.

Concerning Peter and Paul, the increase of the legend was rich and

rapid. Rome and all its environs, above all the way to Ostia, were full

of souvenirs which were pretended to be connected with the last days of

the two apostles. A crowd of touching circumstances; the flight of

Peter; the vision of Jesus bearing his cross, _iterum crucifigi_; the

final adieu of Peter and Paul; the meeting of Peter with his wife; Paul

at the Salvian waters; Plautilla sending the handkerchief which bound

her hair to bandage the eyes of Paul,--all this presented a beautiful

ensemble, to which was only wanting an ingenuous and skilful writer. It

was too late; the vein of the first Christian literature was spent; the

serenity of the narrator of the Acts was lost; his voice was raised no

more in story or in romance. It is impossible to choose between a crowd

of equally apocryphal writings: in vain one seeks to shield these

recitals with the most venerable names (pseudo-Linus, pseudo-Marcellus);

the Roman legend of Peter and Paul remains always in a sporadic state.

It was more often recounted by the pious guides than seriously read. It

was a local affair: no text concerning it has been consecrated and made

authoritative for reading in the churches.

* * * * *

Many among you, ladies and gentlemen, will go to Rome, or will return

there. Ah, well! if you preserve any good remembrance of these

conferences, go, in memory of me, to the Salvian waters, _alle tre

fontane_, to St. Paul-without-the-Walls. It is one of the most beautiful

parts of the Roman Campagna,--deserted, damp, green, and sad. There, in

a deep depression in the soil, crowned by those grand horizontal lines,

disturbed by no living detail,--there are some clear and cold springs.

The fever and mouldiness of the tomb are inhaled there. Some Trappists

are there established, conscientiously practising their religious

suicide. When you are there, sit down a moment, not too long (one

quickly catches the fever there), and, while the Trappists give you to

drink the water which gushes from the three bounds which the head of

Paul made, think of him who came here to talk of these legends with you,

and to whom you have listened with so much courtesy and kind attention.

English Conferences of Ernest Renan: Rome and Christianity. Marcus Aurelius · 第 25 / 37 题