St. Peter and Rome

Catholic Exchange.com ^ | 11-15-04 | Amy Barragree

[Salvation]

St. Peter and Rome

11/15/04

Dear Catholic Exchange:

Why did St. Peter establish the Church in Rome?

Ed

Dear Ed,

Peace in Christ!

We do not know why Peter went to Rome. The Church has always maintained, based on historical evidence, that Peter went to Rome, but has never taught why this happened. In speculating on this matter, there are two primary considerations.

First, at the time of Jesus and the early Church, the Roman Empire controlled the lands around the Mediterranean, a large portion of what is now Europe, and most of what is now called the Middle East. Rome was one of the biggest, most influential cities in the Western world. It was the center of political authority, economic progress, cultural expression, and many other aspects of life in the Roman Empire. This may have played a role in Peter’s decision to go to Rome.

Second, Jesus promised the Apostles that He would send the Holy Spirit to guide them. Scripture shows Peter following the promptings of the Holy Spirit throughout his ministry. It somehow fits into God’s providence and eternal plan that His Church be established in Rome. Peter may have gone to Rome for no other reason than that is where the Holy Spirit wanted him.

Historical evidence does show that Peter did go to Rome and exercised his authority as head of the Apostles from there. The earliest Christians provided plenty of documentation in this regard.

Among these was St. Irenæus of Lyons, a disciple of St. Polycarp who had received the Gospel from the Apostle St. John. Near the end of his life St. Irenæus mentioned, in his work Against Heresies (c. A.D. 180-199), the work of Peter and Paul in Rome:

Matthew also issued among the Hebrews a written Gospel in their own language, while Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church (Book 3, Chapter 1, verse 1).

The African theologian Tertullian tells us that Peter and Paul both died in Rome in Demurrer Against the Heretics (c. A.D. 200):

Come now, if you would indulge a better curiosity in the business of your salvation, run through the apostolic Churches in which the very thrones of the Apostles remain still in place; in which their own authentic writings are read, giving sound to the voice and recalling the faces of each.... [I]f you are near to Italy, you have Rome, whence also our authority [i.e., in Carthage] derives. How happy is that Church, on which the Apostles poured out their whole doctrine along with their blood, where Peter endured a passion like that of the Lord, where Paul was crowned in a death like John’s [i.e., the Baptist], where the Apostle John, after being immersed in boiling oil and suffering no hurt, was exiled to an island.

Tertullian was certainly not the only ancient author who testified that Peter was crucified in Rome. An ancient, orthodox historical text known as the "Acts of Saints Peter and Paul" elaborates on the preaching and martyrdom of the two Apostles in Rome. The dating of this document is difficult, but historians cited in the Catholic Encyclopedia placed its probable origins between A.D. 150-250.

One of the earliest thorough histories of the Church was Bishop Eusebius of Cæsarea’s Ecclesiastical History. Most of this work was written before Constantine became emperor in A.D. 324, and some portions were added afterward. Eusebius quotes many previous historical documents regarding Peter and Paul’s travels and martyrdom in Rome, including excellent excerpts from ancient documents now lost, like Presbyter Gaius of Rome’s "Disputation with Proclus" (c. A.D. 198-217) and Bishop Dionysius of Corinth’s "Letter to Soter of Rome" (c. A.D. 166-174). Penguin Books publishes a very accessible paperback edition of Eusebius’s history of the Church, and most libraries will probably own a copy as well.

For more ancient accounts of Peter’s presence in Rome, see the writings of the Church Fathers, which are published in various collections. Jurgens’s Faith of the Early Fathers, volumes 1-3, contains a collection of patristic excerpts with a topical index which apologists find very useful (Liturgical Press). Hendrickson Publishers and Paulist Press both publish multi-volume hardcover editions of the works of the Church Fathers. Penguin Books and St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press publish a few works of the Fathers in relatively inexpensive paperback editions.

More treatments of Petrine questions may be found in Stephen K. Ray’s Upon This Rock (Ignatius); Jesus, Peter, & the Keys by Butler, Dahlgren, and Hess (Queenship); Patrick Madrid’s Pope Fiction (Basilica); and in the Catholic Answers tracts “Was Peter In Rome?” and “The Fathers Know Best: Peter In Rome.”

Please feel free to call us at 1-800-MY FAITH or email us with any further questions on this or any other subject. If you have found this information to be helpful, please consider a donation to CUF to help sustain this service. You can call the toll-free line, visit us at www.cuf.org, or send your contribution to the address below. Thank you for your support as we endeavor to “support, defend, and advance the efforts of the teaching Church.”

United in the Faith,

Amy Barragree
Information Specialist
Catholics United for the Faith
827 North Fourth Street
Steubenville, OH 43952
800-MY-FAITH (800-693-2484)

---

Editor's Note: To submit a faith question to Catholic Exchange, email faithquestions@catholicexchange.com. Please note that all email submitted to Catholic Exchange becomes the property of Catholic Exchange and may be published in this space. Published letters may be edited for length and clarity. Names and cities of letter writers may also be published. Email addresses of viewers will not normally be published.

[stfassisi]

Can you read Aramaic

NO,But I know people who can translate for me.

[1000 silverlings]

Cool

[Iscool]

Didn't I read that Babylon was just a code name for Rome??? But then what do we call Babylon???

[Uncle Chip]

Syriac Fathers say Peter was Bishop of Antioch for 30 years

Please post the writings of the Syriac fathers that explicitly say Peter was the Bishop of Antioch for 30 years. Post the actual writings,NOT protestant interpretations please.

Does that mean you want them in the original language?

Perhaps we can help each other. I will help you find all the writings of the Syriac Fathers in that regard, if you will help me find all the writings of the Ante-Nicene Fathers regarding the 25 year Bishopric in Rome? And we will compare them to determine which claim, or if either, is true? What say you?

[1000 silverlings]

But then what do we call Babylon???

History

[AlaninSA]

I have a question for you. Are you a Christian?

Chip's only role here is to be an obnoxious starter of crap.

[Uncle Chip]

It has been a pleasure talking with you. I must get back to my studies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers. Tonight its Irenaeus. Have a good evening ----

[annalex]

both apostles commission was given from someone else...And of course it would be from God...Not Peter

The Great Commission is to evangelize the world, given all the natural apostles by Christ. I am referring to the last chapter of the synoptic gospels. So, I have no argument with that. However, the fact remains that Paul had to establish his credentials and he edscribes how he got them and from whom, in Galatians 2:9.

The Great Commission had nothing to do with Gentiles

Please. I bolded the references to the gentiles.

Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Mt 28:19)

Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. (Mark 16:15)

penance and remission of sins should be preached in his name, unto all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. (Luke 24:47)

When Peter had the experience with the Gentile in Acts 10, it was part of the 'transition'

What "transition"? Is it in the scripture or not? Peter baptized the first gentile, Cornelius. Peter received the vision the the whole Creation is clean. Peter, James and John decided that Peter would breach to the Jews and Paul to the Gentiles. So, it is incorrect to say that Peter has a limited commission or had nothing to do with the Gentiles.

[1000 silverlings]

You really should ping the one you are referring too, per FR rules.

[stfassisi]

Perhaps we can help each other. I will help you find all the writings of the Syriac Fathers in that regard, if you will help me find all the writings of the Ante-Nicene Fathers regarding the 25 year Bishopric in Rome? And we will compare them to determine which claim, or if either, is true? What say you? Certainly, But I doubt we are breaking new ground on this.

[Religion Moderator]

Discuss the issues all you want but do NOT make it personal!

[Aliska]

I'll ponder what you wrote in #128. Had something else in response, but flushed it, could be taken wrong. That took some effort to put that together, and I thank you for it.

[annalex]

Thank you for your questions.

[annalex]

In #123 it should be Armenian Church, one in the country of Armenia, which has nothing to do with a protestant theologian Arminius. Armenia together with Ethiopia hold the distinction of being first countries where Christianity became a state religion, by the way. Rome was third.

Among pre-chalcedon Churches are Coptic, Syrian and Armenian Apostolic (Catholicosate of Cilicia) Churches.

Sorry.

[Quix]

Much appreciate your clarification. Thanks.

[Quix]

- The Protestant communities of faith that departed from the Latin rite of the Catholic Church , and continue fracturing themselves. Whatever their accomplishments are, their existence is wholly secondary to the Latin Church of Rome, of whom they received everything they continue to keep.

This is all I meant: that genetically the Protestant communities are children of Rome.
= = = =

I still read and construe history differently.

1. Believers did not receive from organizations and certainly not from human focused; human established; human structured organizations of any kiind or origin--and especially not RELIGIOUS organizations given to lording it over one another.

2. Believers received directly from CHRIST--KING OF KINGS; LORD OF LORDS; RULER OF ALL THAT IS.

3. Further, Christ left His Spirit to carry on a continual daily refilling of each believer; moment guidance of each believers; moment by moment praying always of each believer . . .

4. If anything, a much greater case than being a blessing can be made that particularly the Roman hierarchy and organizational edifice from approximately 200 whatever it really became established has been brutal to believers FAR MORE than it has been supportive and encouraging of them having a DIRECT RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD

instead of a parasitic relationship with the organization and the hierarchy.

5. Believers everywhere have no SECONDARY EXISTENCE to one another nor to any human organization nor to any congregation.

6. BEFORE THE CROSS IS THE UTMOST OF LEVEL PLAYING FIELDS. Those not willing to be equal before The Cross shall be in danger of losing the benefits of The Cross or at least suffering serioius discip;ines.

7. As best as I can recall, EVERY effort in The Gospels to out rank another even disciple or believer WAS SLAPPED DOWN FIERCELY by Jesus The Christ.

8. There is no genetic delivery of Biblical truth from the Romanist tradition, imho. Whatever good may have filtered to other Christian groups from the Romanist traditions had already been wholesale delivered by Christ and His Spirit directly in a myriad of ways through a myriad of channels throughout the centuries including before the Romanist traditions began in 200 whatever AD.

9. God doesn't have grandchildren. He only has Children.

10. The Romanist tradition and all other human constructions and organizations will be tested and judged on what they did each and collectively with what God gave them. How well did they match up as being conformed to the image of Christ? No appeals to so called spiritual genetic ancestors will avail a gnat's fart's worth of benefit.

[185JHP]

BTTT

[Quix]

Thanks Bro.

Nice to see you around once in a while! LOL.

LUB, God's best to you and your family. A FREEPMAIL update would be grand.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for sharing your testimony and insights and concerns!

Truly, God does not "need" man much less any institution of man to accomplish His will.

However, I also happily receive the promise that everything works together for the good for those who love God and are called according to His purpose. And the Roman Catholic Church - as well as other Christian confessions - are part of that "everything" which works together for the good of those who love God and are called according to His purpose.

As hosepipe puts it, "God didn't come to establish a religion but rather a family."

The religion was already in place from the law and the prophets. Christ came to fulfill the law and the prophets, and neither will change until the new heaven and new earth.

It's all "about" Him, therefore religious labels just don't mean much of anything to me.