Editorial note — St. Peter, First Bishop of Rome.

[Footnote 114: Occasionally the love of novelty induces some Catholic writer to differ from his brethren. This is the case with Hug, who holds that we cannot admit mystical names in the letters of the apostles, as there is no instance of their use, save in this disputed case. This is criticism based on internal evidence run mad. One would suppose that there was a perfect course of sacred epistolary literature in the New Testament, based on fixed rules, instead of a few detached letters, written by different authors at different times, without any communication or agreement with one another about literary style. There is nothing more fallacious than the interpretation of any of the letters of the apostles on mere internal evidence. Hug's remark at most shows that internal evidence does not afford any proof that St. Peter meant Rome, which no one will deny.]