Surely you are not going to tell us that Peter had a 13 year long distance Bishopric with his flock in Rome? And if he had been away that long, surely he would have written letters to them during those 13 years. Where are those? Where are any? Nowhere because it never happened.
Apostles travelled and established churches. Bishops resided with their churches and shepherded their flock, and they did not take 13 year sabbaticals away from their flocks without resigning their bishoprics.
The Church at Rome was not established by Peter in 42 or any time by Peter. It was established by Paul after he wrote his Epistle to the Romans which was circa 56 AD.
In Ch 1:11 of Romans Paul writes: "For I long to see you that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift to the end that ye may be ESTABLISHED". As late as 56 AD there were believers there in Rome but without a spiritual gift and therefore not established in the apostolic way. And Paul did that when he was taken to Rome.
No, Ray does not say that Peter was away from Rome for 13 years. I have no idea where you are getting that.
Is Ray right or Jerome?
Once again, the very notion that one has to choose between Jerome and Ray is a construct of your own making. Do you notice a pattern here? You are revealing your rush to find contradictions where there are none, and thus revealing your cynical/skeptical approach to the Fathers and to Catholicism, not a genuine truth-seeking approach.
Given that you have just started to read the fathers, it is amazing to me that you have the audacity to make such hand-waving dismissals of long-established traditions and claims of the Fathers.
The commandment to honor and mother and father does not merely apply to our biological parents, but also to our mothers and fathers in the faith. And that includes the Church Fathers.
-A8
Since you are such an adherent to sola scriptura, please cite your source of this.