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.

[Uncle Chip]

Read it again ---

[HarleyD]

That's rather interesting but, in the end, it in itself is speculation much like the Catholics. I'm not an expert on these various manuscripts but it's generally my experience when someone starts stating this or that, I prefer to go back to the original writings and verify it myself; I don't care who the source is. People see things in documents I sure don't see and I generally prefer to give the writers the benefit of the doubt. I'm not a smart or clever person but I do understand that all writing except scripture is fallible.

I have read a number of these early writings on various websites. More often than not I find them to be inconclusive about details unless they're specifically referencing some heretic or event. Often times these writing are very vague. Although they're good for the general thought of the early Christians, people make far too much out of them.

I would say that if Ignatius states Paul and Peter to be in Rome, then there MIGHT have been some truth to it and most likely was. That doesn't confirm anything-certainly not Peter living there for 25 years. He doesn't say that and gives the impression of just the opposite. One father building upon Ignatius writings, which I can read, becomes nothing more than a myth.

I wouldn't idly speculate about the "evils" of early Popes. I think there is enough factual information about some of the later ones to form conclusions. Pope Leo wanted people to kiss his dirty muddy toes, and this is someone who the Catholics feels infallibly made decisions for the Church? Pope Horatio was considered a heretic after he served 16 years and they burned all his writings so what does that say? They ran one Pope (Urbana???) out of the Vatican. For a number of years the Catholics had two (sometimes three) Popes serving in various parts of Europe although they would like to say there has always only been one, even though both were duly elected. And then there is the infamous legend of Pope "Joan" but we won't go there. I'm not impress when the Catholics try to explain to me the pedigree line of Popes.

BTW-I noticed you do not subscribe to "replacement" theology. Christians do not "replace" our Jewish forefathers but we have been grafted in to the heritage of Abraham. This isn't just the teaching of both Catholic and Protestants, this is the teaching of scripture as well. Paul is clear on the fact that we believing Gentiles have been "grafted in" with the Jews. Unbelieving Jews are not children of Abraham. Jewish believers are our forefathers. It is difficult to argue with the plain teaching of scripture written mostly by Jews. If your looking into history, I would suggest you look more objectively into this matter.

[Coleus]

wow, so many comments.

[Mad Dawg]

Tell me why I should.

[Lil Flower]

Your church claims that YOU can't know for certain if you are saved, until you die and go thru purgatory...

Apparently you have problem actually reading what I say. I never said you personally can't know of your salvation, I said you cannot judge another persons soul. You may know of your own salvation, but you cannot know mine, know matter how much you think you can.

And yet I speak of Jesus and lost souls and not of myself...

your opinion IS of yourself, and not of Christ. And as I recall you told me to post my personal testimony and YOU would give me your opinion as to whether or not it was real or not. You don't speak for Christ, you speak for Iscool. I am not interested in what Iscool thinks of my soul, I am only interested in what Christ thinks of my soul.Notice I have not called any of your beliefs false, nor have I questioned your salvation,nor have I judged you based on which church you choose to worship, I have only defended myself against you.

[Diego1618]

My reference to post #617 was mainly referring to your statement of Linus being the second Pope....and Uncle chip's statement, in that post, who he thought Linus really was.

I understand this is not scripture, but it is interesting how some things just seem to line up....when we take the blinders off.

[Lil Flower]

Amen. Good words for us all to live by.

[Mad Dawg]

Hysteron de anakeimenois autois hendeka ephanerwthe [where w is an omega), kai wneidisen ten apistian auton kai sklerokardian [evidently, they could have used, say, lipitor] hoti tois theasamenos auton egegermenon ouk episteusan. [So Jesus is talking to the eleven, NOT to Paul, after the resurrection.] kai eipen autois Poreuthentes eis ton kosmon hapanta keruxate to euaggelion pase te ktisei.

Yep, he told the Disciples (except Judas, who was doing something else at the time] to go into all the world. Don't you agree?

What is this, Tangle with Catholics weekend or something?

[Lil Flower]

Your multi-million dollar buildings and statues and pictures mean nothing to me, and God, I'm sure...That stuff isn't Christianity, it's religion...Fact is, Jesus says sell all that stuff and give it to the poor...

Tell that to John Hagee, and Benny Hinn, and TBN, and Chuck Missler, and Rod Parsley and.......

[Mad Dawg]

It's just WAY more fun to beat up on the Church if you don't take the trouble to find out what her teachings really are. Who wants to do all that pesky studying when you can rack up points with your anti-Catholic friends whether or not your wild accusations have any basis in fact.

It's sort of economic in its simplicity. They tell us we have blinders on, that we don't love the truth and all that, so it's pretty clear this is not about reasoned persuasion but about venting. And there's less expense of time and mental effort if they don't trouble to find out what we really believe, but the joy of venting is undiminished.

Hence the weird remarks --remarks that often leave me scratching my head and wondering WHERE did THAT come from?

Oh and then there's the "We know what you REALLY belive, better than YOU do."

Of course, I'm just back from my Masonic meeting where, as soon as we got went through our correspondence with the tri-lateral commission we engaged in fertility rites celebrating the union of Jesus with Mary Magdalene, aka the Holy Grail, and the preservation of their bloodline in the person of Madonna. (Does she have a great disguise or WHAT?) So I MAY have missed something. But somehow I think not. Tell Simon Magus "hey," for me, okay? He should remember who I am. After all, I paid good money for this power ...

(shaking head ...)

[Running On Empty]

I saw Hagee just once on TV--by mistake, I'm happy to say.
What he ws saying seemed incredulous to me.

So I went to his website.

Jack Chick impersonator, he is.

[Running On Empty]

'preciate that. :-)

[Mad Dawg]

guarantee of salvation promised by the sacrament of Baptism, right?

Who promises that? Not the Roman Catholic Church, any more than we say Popes can't err.

If you're really interested in persuading us, perhaps it would help if you learned what we believe. Every time you make some claim about us that isn't true, you forfeit your claim to be taken seriously.

[Running On Empty]

"Every time you make some claim about us that isn't true,, you forfeit your claim to be taken seriously"

True.

[Mad Dawg]

That there is one of the most fabulously psychotic arguments I've read in a long time.

I think we're done here.

[ladyinred]

BRAVO!

[saradippity]

Do you think the designation of Israelite is interchangeable with the designation of Judean?

[saradippity]

Jesus Christ is the Word of God. Everything He said;to whom He said it;what He said to whom;where He said it;why He said it to whomsoever He said it; all need to be looked at very carefully.

People who limit the Word of God to what they believe Jesus said when they read and interpret their translation of the Bible miss a whole lot.

[ladyinred]

Jack Chick impersonator, he is.

How is that?

[Diego1618]

Simon Magus, the first Bishop of the counterfeit Church of Rome.

If you look in the "Authorized Version" of the New Testament you'll find three words missing. "Amen" at the end of The Book of Acts, "Amen" at the end of The Book of James and "Amen" at the end of III John. The Greek manuscripts of the received text also do not show any "Amen" for these three books.

All of the other books of the New Testament have a formal closing....except these three. The Acts, as we have been discussing, is primarily a history of the first few years of the Church and spends most of the time with Paul. It ends abruptly with Paul still in Rome under house arrest. We know that he was taken to Rome twice but the book of Acts only covers this first incarceration. We touched on the fact that he may have gone on to Spain and Britain between these two arrests but no scripture will verify that. I believe that the Book of Acts is yet to be finished and it may or may not be the "Sonnini Manuscript" (post #617). Nevertheless it has no formal closing!

The book of James is addressed to whom???? The Twelve Tribes scattered among the Nations. We have been discussing the ministry of the Twelve Apostles, primarily Peter, and where he (they) did go. Well, we know that our Lord and Saviour told them in [Matthew 10:5-6] not to go among the Gentiles or Samaritans but go to the "Lost Sheep of the House of Israel"......the twelve tribes scattered among the Nations. We also know that this is exactly where the Apostle Peter went. He writes from Babylon to God's elect! [1 Peter 1:1-2] These folks are Israelites, scattered during the dispersion and they have a Foreknowledge of God. They are not Gentiles! And James is addressing these folks also and probably many others to whom Peter and the other Apostles are visiting... or soon to visit. I believe the Book of James in incomplete also because I don't believe the Lord wants yet to disclose exactly where these Israelites were....or now are...yet.

This brings us to III John....and Simon Magus. As I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, John wrote late....and as such, was well aware of the corruption of the Gospel which began immediately after Pentecost and was well under way by the time he wrote his Epistles, Gospel and Revelation. John mentions in verses 9 and 10 that there is malicious gossip and shunning by one of the bishops, Diotrephes, and he has excommunicated some and refuses entry to others. He puts himself first (verse 9). These passages show what Paul refers to more than once...[Galatians 1:6][II Thessalonians 2:3-7][Acts 20:29-30][II Timothy 2:17-18] and of course, [Jude 4]. This diabolical counterfeit religion of Simon Magus had crept into the early Church and John did not even dare to put it in writing [III John 13]. He wanted to wait and see "Gaius" in person to discuss the matter further....face to face!

For this reason, and the lack of an "Amen" at the close of III John, it tells me that his book is yet incomplete also and we will learn more later on about this sinister corruption of the Gospel by Simon Magus.