Cornelius a Lapide

Then after three years I went up to Jetusalem to see Peter . Chrysostom and Theophylact remark on the distinction between ISeiv and the word loroprjo-ai , used here. This latter is used of those who visit and go round splendid cities, like Rome, and carefully inspect its monuments, its Pontiff, its Cardinals, its clergy, and holy men. I came to Jerusalem, says S. Paul, to see Peter, not to learn anything from him (though Erasmus thinks that Urroprj<rat connotes this), for I had been taught from above, but merely to see and pay my respect to the chief of the Apostles (Theodoret, Chrysostom, Ambrose, Jerome). In Gal it 2 Paul gives another reason for his visit S. Chrysostom writes : “ Peter was the chief and the mouth of the Apostles , and therfore Paul went up to see him especially ” ( Horn . in foan . 87). And S. Jerome on this passage: “ Paul came to see Peter — not to gaze on his eyes , cheeks , and countenance — to see if he was fat or lean , if he had a hooked or a straight nose , whether he had hair on his head or was (as Clement relates) bald headed Nor is it to be S. PAUL AND S. PETER 233 Supposed consistent with apostolical dignity , that after such a preparation of three years he should wish to see anything in Peter that was merely human . Paul saw Cephas with those same eyes with which he himself is seen still by those who have power to see him . If this does not seem clear to any one , let him compare this sentence with the one before , in which it is said that the Apostles conferred nothing on him . For he went to Jerusalem , that he might see an Apostle , not to learn anything from him— for both had the same authority for their preaching — but to do honour to one who was an Apostle before him.” From this it is clear that Paul did not see Peter that he might be taught by him, as Erasmus and Vatablus think. For this is contradicted by Gal ii. 6 : “ They added nothing to me,” and by Gal. i. 11, 12, where he expressly says that he had been taught not by man but by God