11 Reasons the Authority of Christianity Is Centered on St. Peter and Rome

stpeterslist ^ | December 19, 2012

[NYer]

Bl. John Henry Newman said it best: “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.” History paints an overwhelming picture of St. Peter’s apostolic ministry in Rome and this is confirmed by a multitude of different sources within the Early Church. Catholic Encyclopedia states, “In opposition to this distinct and unanimous testimony of early Christendom, some few Protestant historians have attempted in recent times to set aside the residence and death of Peter at Rome as legendary. These attempts have resulted in complete failure.” Protestantism as a whole seeks to divorce Christianity from history by rending Gospel message out of its historical context as captured by our Early Church Fathers. One such target of these heresies is to devalue St. Peter and to twist the authority of Rome into a historical mishap within Christianity. To wit, the belief has as its end the ultimate end of all Catholic and Protestant dialogue – who has authority in Christianity?

 

Why is it important to defend the tradition of St. Peter and Rome?
The importance of establishing St. Peter’s ministry in Rome may be boiled down to authority and more specifically the historic existence and continuance of the Office of Vicar held by St. Peter. To understand why St. Peter was important and what authority was given to him by Christ SPL has composed two lists – 10 Biblical Reasons Christ Founded the Papacy and 13 Reasons St. Peter Was the Prince of the Apostles.

The rest of the list is cited from the Catholic Encyclopedia on St. Peter and represents only a small fraction of the evidence set therein.

 

The Apostolic Primacy of St. Peter and Rome

It is an indisputably established historical fact that St. Peter laboured in Rome during the last portion of his life, and there ended his earthly course by martyrdom. As to the duration of his Apostolic activity in the Roman capital, the continuity or otherwise of his residence there, the details and success of his labours, and the chronology of his arrival and death, all these questions are uncertain, and can be solved only on hypotheses more or less well-founded. The essential fact is that Peter died at Rome: this constitutes the historical foundation of the claim of the Bishops of Rome to the Apostolic Primacy of Peter.

St. Peter’s residence and death in Rome are established beyond contention as historical facts by a series of distinct testimonies extending from the end of the first to the end of the second centuries, and issuing from several lands.

 

1. The Gospel of St. John

That the manner, and therefore the place of his death, must have been known in widely extended Christian circles at the end of the first century is clear from the remark introduced into the Gospel of St. John concerning Christ’s prophecy that Peter was bound to Him and would be led whither he would not — “And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God” (John 21:18-19, see above). Such a remark presupposes in the readers of the Fourth Gospel a knowledge of the death of Peter.

 

2. Salutations, from Babylon

St. Peter’s First Epistle was written almost undoubtedly from Rome, since the salutation at the end reads: “The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my son Mark” (5:13). Babylon must here be identified with the Roman capital; since Babylon on the Euphrates, which lay in ruins, or New Babylon (Seleucia) on the Tigris, or the Egyptian Babylon near Memphis, or Jerusalem cannot be meant, the reference must be to Rome, the only city which is called Babylon elsewhere in ancient Christian literature (Revelation 17:5; 18:10; “Oracula Sibyl.”, V, verses 143 and 159, ed. Geffcken, Leipzig, 1902, 111).

 

3. Gospel of St. Mark

From Bishop Papias of Hierapolis and Clement of Alexandria, who both appeal to the testimony of the old presbyters (i.e., the disciples of the Apostles), we learn that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome at the request of the Roman Christians, who desired a written memorial of the doctrine preached to them by St. Peter and his disciples (Eusebius, Church History II.15, 3.40, 6.14); this is confirmed by Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3.1). In connection with this information concerning the Gospel of St. Mark, Eusebius, relying perhaps on an earlier source, says that Peter described Rome figuratively as Babylon in his First Epistle.

 

4. Testimony of Pope St. Clement I

Another testimony concerning the martyrdom of Peter and Paul is supplied by Clement of Rome in his Epistle to the Corinthians (written about A.D. 95-97), wherein he says (chapter 5):

“Through zeal and cunning the greatest and most righteous supports [of the Church] have suffered persecution and been warred to death. Let us place before our eyes the good Apostles — St. Peter, who in consequence of unjust zeal, suffered not one or two, but numerous miseries, and, having thus given testimony (martyresas), has entered the merited place of glory”.

He then mentions Paul and a number of elect, who were assembled with the others and suffered martyrdom “among us” (en hemin, i.e., among the Romans, the meaning that the expression also bears in chapter 4). He is speaking undoubtedly, as the whole passage proves, of the Neronian persecution, and thus refers the martyrdom of Peter and Paul to that epoch.

 

5. Testimony of St. Ignatius of Antioch

In his letter written at the beginning of the second century (before 117), while being brought to Rome for martyrdom, the venerable Bishop Ignatius of Antioch endeavours by every means to restrain the Roman Christians from striving for his pardon, remarking: “I issue you no commands, like Peter and Paul: they were Apostles, while I am but a captive” (Epistle to the Romans 4). The meaning of this remark must be that the two Apostles laboured personally in Rome, and with Apostolic authority preached the Gospel there.

 

6. Taught in the Same Place in Italy

Bishop Dionysius of Corinth, in his letter to the Roman Church in the time of Pope Soter (165-74), says:

“You have therefore by your urgent exhortation bound close together the sowing of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both planted the seed of the Gospel also in Corinth, and together instructed us, just as they likewise taught in the same place in Italy and at the same time suffered martyrdom” (in Eusebius, Church History II.25).

 

 

7. Rome: Founded by Sts. Peter and Paul

Irenaeus of Lyons, a native of Asia Minor and a disciple of Polycarp of Smyrna (a disciple of St. John), passed a considerable time in Rome shortly after the middle of the second century, and then proceeded to Lyons, where he became bishop in 177; he described the Roman Church as the most prominent and chief preserver of the Apostolic tradition, as “the greatest and most ancient church, known by all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul” (Against Heresies 3.3; cf. 3.1). He thus makes use of the universally known and recognized fact of the Apostolic activity of Peter and Paul in Rome, to find therein a proof from tradition against the heretics.

 

8. St. Peter Announced the Word of God in Rome

In his “Hypotyposes” (Eusebius, Church History IV.14), Clement of Alexandria, teacher in the catechetical school of that city from about 190, says on the strength of the tradition of the presbyters: “After Peter had announced the Word of God in Rome and preached the Gospel in the spirit of God, the multitude of hearers requested Mark, who had long accompanied Peter on all his journeys, to write down what the Apostles had preached to them” (see above).

 

9. Rome: Where Authority is Ever Within Reach

Like Irenaeus, Tertullian appeals, in his writings against heretics, to the proof afforded by the Apostolic labours of Peter and Paul in Rome of the truth of ecclesiastical tradition. In De Præscriptione 36, he says:

“If thou art near Italy, thou hast Rome where authority is ever within reach. How fortunate is this Church for which the Apostles have poured out their whole teaching with their blood, where Peter has emulated the Passion of the Lord, where Paul was crowned with the death of John.”

In Scorpiace 15, he also speaks of Peter’s crucifixion. “The budding faith Nero first made bloody in Rome. There Peter was girded by another, since he was bound to the cross”. As an illustration that it was immaterial with what water baptism is administered, he states in his book (On Baptism 5) that there is “no difference between that with which John baptized in the Jordan and that with which Peter baptized in the Tiber”; and against Marcion he appeals to the testimony of the Roman Christians, “to whom Peter and Paul have bequeathed the Gospel sealed with their blood” (Against Marcion 4.5).

 

10. Come to the Vatican and See for Yourself

The Roman, Caius, who lived in Rome in the time of Pope Zephyrinus (198-217), wrote in his “Dialogue with Proclus” (in Eusebius, Church History II.25) directed against the Montanists: “But I can show the trophies of the Apostles. If you care to go to the Vatican or to the road to Ostia, thou shalt find the trophies of those who have founded this Church”.

By the trophies (tropaia) Eusebius understands the graves of the Apostles, but his view is opposed by modern investigators who believe that the place of execution is meant. For our purpose it is immaterial which opinion is correct, as the testimony retains its full value in either case. At any rate the place of execution and burial of both were close together; St. Peter, who was executed on the Vatican, received also his burial there. Eusebius also refers to “the inscription of the names of Peter and Paul, which have been preserved to the present day on the burial-places there” (i.e. at Rome).

 

11. Ancient Epigraphic Memorial

There thus existed in Rome an ancient epigraphic memorial commemorating the death of the Apostles. The obscure notice in the Muratorian Fragment (“Lucas optime theofile conprindit quia sub praesentia eius singula gerebantur sicuti et semote passionem petri evidenter declarat”, ed. Preuschen, Tübingen, 1910, p. 29) also presupposes an ancient definite tradition concerning Peter’s death in Rome.

The apocryphal Acts of St. Peter and the Acts of Sts. Peter and Paul likewise belong to the series of testimonies of the death of the two Apostles in Rome.

[CynicalBear]

So what would you say designates a person as “not Christian”?

[CynicalBear]

>> you think that somewhere in the 16th century the truth of Christianity came out of the woodwork??????<<

Oh no! They were the ones who actually survived the period when the RCC was killing Christians.

>> Luther, Wesley, Calvin, Henry VIII, Zwingley et al knew of Christ because the Catholic church had taught them about Him!!! <<

LOL The actually learned about the true Jesus when they got their hands on the true scripture after the RCC had corrupted and even kept out of the hands of the masses any access to the written word.

[terycarl]

Besides, if it is an unbloody sacrifice that Catholics participate in, then what exactly are they doing at communion? There is no blood to shed to participate in by drinking the cup therefore they cannot partake communion as they say Jesus instructed, drinking the literal, actual blood of Jesus. Therefore no Catholic can ever be saved by partaking of the euchrist because there is no cup to drink from.

where on earth do you get your information on the Catholic church???First of all, Catholics believe that the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ is present in both the consecrated bread and the consecrated wine....you do not need both. Secondly, Catholics are indeed offered a chalice to drink from because the church has decided to offer both at communion. Since we share a common vessel, it is only practical not to share the cup if you have a cold, flu, or something like a cold sore.....we are still susceptable to contageous things.

as far as the Eucharist is concerned, only Roman Catholics and the Eastern rite Catholics share in the true eucharist.

I understand that in some protestant denominations, the wine is given to parishoners in a little, individual paper cup which is later discarded. Catholics believe that every drop of the precious blood is indeed precious and every effort is made to insure that NONE of it is ever improperly disposed of.

[terycarl]

So you give credit to the RCC instead of God for preserving the Gospel?

of course not, but the RCC was certainly the tool that He used to do so. I don't give credit to Mary instead of God for the incarnation, but I do recognize her as the chosen avenue for His intervention on earth.

[Syncro]

....there is one true Christian religion and it is Catholicism. If you claim to be a Christian, but choose not to follow the Catholic church, you are a protestant.

Totally untrue, and has been proven so all over this and on other thread.

A person can become a Christian without having any involvement with Catholicism or Protestantism.

[terycarl]

Oh no! They were the ones who actually survived the period when the RCC was killing Christians. >> Luther, Wesley, Calvin, Henry VIII, Zwingley et al knew of Christ because the Catholic church had taught them about Him!!! << LOL The actually learned about the true Jesus when they got their hands on the true scripture after the RCC had corrupted and even kept out of the hands of the masses any access to the written word.

Good grief, they get their hands on true scripture....and that came from where???? The Church kept scripture out of the hands of noone....Recall that in those days, bibles were hand copied by CATHOLIC monks in monastaries and thus were VERY expensive. They were basically available to the wealthy, royalty, and a few libraries. The average Christian couldn'd possible afford to have one. When the printing press was invented by Mr Gutenburg, the word of God became much more inexpensive to own!!!

you also mentioned that the Catholic church had "corrupted" the word of God.....corrupted whose version??? The church was the sole source of scripture and corrupted nothing.

[CynicalBear]

That meme about the Catholic Church “giving us the scripture” is rather empty when you understand that God used Herod, Pontius Pilot, Judas and others to advance His plan.

[terycarl]

A person can become a Christian without having any involvement with Catholicism or Protestantism.

Nope...if you decide to be a Christian, but don't follow the Catholic church, you are a protestant.

[terycarl]

That meme about the Catholic Church “giving us the scripture” is rather empty when you understand that God used Herod, Pontius Pilot, Judas and others to advance His plan.

Scripture is a recording of what happened and when. You will notice that all those people are mentioned in the scripture that the Catholic church brought down to you.

[CynicalBear]

>> The Church kept scripture out of the hands of noone....<<

Oh really?

COUNCIL OF TOULOUSE - 1229 A.D

Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; unless anyone from motive of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.

Source: Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe, Edited with an introduction by Edward Peters, Scolar Press, London, copyright 1980 by Edward Peters, ISBN 0-85967-621-8, pp. 194-195, citing S. R. Maitland, Facts and Documents [illustrative of the history, doctrine and rites, of the ancient Albigenses & Waldenses], London, Rivington, 1832, pp. 192-194.

The Council of Tarragona of 1234, in its second canon:

"No one may possess the books of the Old and New Testaments in the Romance language, and if anyone possesses them he must turn them over to the local bishop within eight days after promulgation of this decree, so that they may be burned lest, be he a cleric or a layman, he be suspected until he is cleared of all suspicion." (-D. Lortsch, Historie de la Bible en France, 1910, p.14.)

[CynicalBear]

>>You will notice that all those people are mentioned in the scripture that the Catholic church brought down to you.<<

LOL Yeah, and there were no other historians who ever recorded anything from the period right?

[daniel1212]

Yes, stats i have by God’s grace, but they are quite extensive: http://www.peacebyjesus.net/rc-stats_vs._evang.pdf Search abortion, birth and contraceptives/.

You want them here?

[Syncro]

A person can become a Christian without having any involvement with Catholicism or Protestantism.

Nope...if you decide to be a Christian, but don't follow the Catholic church, you are a protestant.

**Sigh**

There is this Guy, His name is Jesus.

He says different.

He is God.

It seems you follow some type of erroneous Catholic teachings which DENIES Jesus Christ and his Holy Word.

For you to tell millions of Christians that they are not Christians because they do not follow your denomination is absolutely absurd and actually...kind of sad the indroctination has apparently seared your conscience against God.

Oh and BTW, MANY Catholics on this thread disagree with you.

Heck, Peter disagrees with you.

And so does Paul. Notice the scriptures below don't mention the Catholic Church as necessary for Salvation.

How do
you receive salvation ( new birth - be born again ) ??


In Romans 10:9-11, the Apostle Paul teaches,
"Because if you acknowledge and confess
with your lips that Jesus is Lord
and in your heart believe ( adhere to, trust in and rely on the truth ) that

God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart a person
believes ( adheres to, trusts in
and relies on Christ ) and so is justified
( declared righteous, acceptable to God ) and with the mouth he
confesses ( declares openly and speaks out freely his faith ) and confirms ( his )
salvation".

What is the promise of salvation ( the new birth )?
It is that when anyone receives Jesus as Lord,
they receive the assurance of
Romans 10:11 which says, "No man who believes in Him ( adheres to, relies on

and trusts in Him ) will ( ever ) be put to shame or be disappointed". And
then the apostle John further
confirms, "But to as many as did receive and
welcome Him, He ( the Father ) gave the authority ( power,
privilege, right ) to become the children of God, that is, to those who believe in ( adhere to,
trust in,
and rely on ) His name". God becomes Father and we are His
children.

The above is what is known as a pearl. Do with it what you wish.

If you wish to have a personal relationship with Jesus and be born again and saved for all time and eternity, pray this prayer.

A Prayer for Salvation ( Please say this out loud )

Heavenly Father, I come to You in the Name of Jesus. Your Word says, "Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved"
( Acts 2:21 ). I am calling on You. I pray and ask Jesus to come into my heart and be Lord over my life according to Romans 10:9-10.
"If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead,
thou shalt be saved." I do that now. I confess that Jesus is Lord, and I believe in my heart that God raised Him from the dead.
I am now reborn! I am a Christian - a child of Almighty God! I am saved!

By saying this prayer out loud you have been heard by God and have heard it yourself meeting God's requirement to be saved. You are now a born-again child of God the Father through the shed blood of Jesus!

Becoming a born again Christian is a simple process but sometimes it requires giving up making false statement denying others the same gift.

I hope and pray for your salvation!

If you decide to be a Christian, but don't follow the Catholic church Jesus Christ, you are a protestant not a Christian.

[terycarl]

That meme about the Catholic Church “giving us the scripture” is rather empty when you understand that God used Herod, Pontius Pilot, Judas and others to advance His plan.

Scripture is a recording of what happened and when. You will notice that all those people are mentioned in the scripture that the Catholic church brought down to you.

[terycarl]

>>You will notice that all those people are mentioned in the scripture that the Catholic church brought down to you.<< LOL Yeah, and there were no other historians who ever recorded anything from the period right?

sure there were, but not as far as they were related to the church. If the church had not brought you the bible, you might have been able to find out something about pilate, but certainly not his relevance to the church.

[terycarl]

there were many false “scripture” interpretations around at the time. The church knew that people could not afford the true hand written copies from the monastaries, hence, for their own protection, and to prevent heresies from spreading, they regulated reading material to the masses.

[Heart-Rest]

"Exodus 31:18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God."

That is not referring to a "Book in the Bible".

Those "tables of stone" contained the "Ten Commandments", which are quoted in a number of Books in the Bible (including the Book of Exodus itself - Chapter 20, the Book of Deuteronomy - Chapter 5, and partially in the Book of Matthew - Chapter 19, and in the Book of Romans - Chapter 13), but every single one of those Books (including "Exodus", which you quoted from) were written by imperfect, weak, frail human beings who God used as His chosen instruments to communicate for Him.

[metmom]

You can't say "I'm born again" and then lead whatever kind of lifestyle that you choose.

Who said that??

Give me the link to one post here on FR where anyone has ever said that or made that claim.

That is nothing more than a strawman that Catholics keep erecting and beating up on about non-Catholics.

The only ones who seem to think that anyone believes it are the Catholics.

[metmom]

The Catholic church made the original translations...they know what they're doing. Without them, we wouldn't have a bible at all.

That cannot be supported as fact.

The Catholic church did NOT write the OT, the Jewish Scripture, and the NT was written before the recorded history of the Catholic church.

This laying claim retroactively to being responsible for the existence of the Bible is simply a power grab to try to control Scripture, and non-Catholics who adhere to it.

[Heart-Rest]

"We don't need to confess to priests when we can go right to God Himself."

Yes, we do ask God the Father to forgive us our sins, as Jesus taught us in "The Lord's Prayer", and we know that Jesus Christ the Son also forgives sins (see, for example, Matthew 9, Mark 2, Luke 5, Luke 7), but God has also graciously made available to us human beings (including you, metmom, and me -- His children), a tremendously valuable gift, with many related, additional, collateral benefits, in the Sacrament of Reconciliation, which God designed and willed to be, as can be plainly seen from the following commands Jesus Christ made after His Resurrection:

John 20:19-23

19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.”

20 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.

21 Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.”

22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.

23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

Do you believe Jesus Christ said those words after His Resurrection?

Do you believe He had a real purpose in saying them, and that He really meant them?

God often delegates MANY tasks to mere, imperfect, weak, frail human beings to do, which He could obviously perform Himself without any human help if He chose to do so.

Another clear example of that is when God commands human beings to "Be fruitful and multiply". God could easily have arranged to do that process all by Himself, but in His infinite wisdom, He chose to retain a part which He performs in that sacred process, and also to make use of some actions by imperfect, weak, frail, human beings, the mother and the father, to which He delegates other important parts of that sacred process which they have to do as well.