ularly Eustochia Jerome speaks in very nearly the same terms of the Roman see.
Should his words be taken literally, or should we not rather see in them only a bit of flattery addressed to the Pope — the rather that Damasus had given to Jerome pledges not only of protection but of friendship? At all events, it is certain that we cannot take them literally without making St. Jerome contradict himself. We notice, in the first place, that he recognized but one First in the Church — Jesus Christ; that he calls the Apostle Peter the rock on which the Church is built, asserting at the same time that Christ alone is that rock, and that the title of secondary stones belongs equally to all the Apostles and to the Prophets. "The stones,"[1] he says, "must be understood to mean the Prophets and the Apostles. The Church is the rock founded upon the most solid stone." He teaches that the Church is represented by the Apostles and Prophets, meaning that it is established upon both — "super prophetas et apostolos constituta." Yet, in his letter to Damasus, he seems to say that Peter is the foundation of the Church, to the exclusion of the others.
But did he not, perhaps, mean to imply that Peter had some superiority as a foundation of the Church? Not so; for he clearly says the contrary: "The solidity of the Church," he says, "is supported upon them (the Apostles and Prophets) equally.[2] He calls Peter prince of the Apostles; but he also says: "He (Christ) shows us Peter and Andrew — princes of the Apostles — established as teachers of the Gospel."
Was this principality of Peter an authority, as might be inferred from the letter to Damasus? Jerome answers that q,uestion in the following passage:[3] "What can be claimed for Aristotle that we do not find in Paul?
