Author Topic: "No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"  (Read 849 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JamesR

  • Virginal Chicano Blood
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,440
  • St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!
  • Faith: Misotheistic Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
"No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"
« on: March 20, 2013, 12:08:41 AM »
This is something I heard from this old man at my Church who was in the middle of a polemic rant about the Roman Catholic Church, and something that he--along with two other old men I know--said really stood out to me. He said that there is not even any historical evidence at all that St. Peter ever even traveled to Rome. This surprised me, because as far as I know, our Church tradition also says that he went to Rome, so I don't really see how this man could make this claim without slitting our own Church's throat. How much truth is there to this statement?
...Or it's just possible he's a mouthy young man on an internet forum.
In the infinite wisdom of God, James can be all three.

Online Salpy

  • Section Moderator
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,215
  • New Martyrs of Libya pray for us!
Re: "No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"
« Reply #1 on: March 20, 2013, 12:13:33 AM »
Didn't Eusebius write that St. Peter went to Rome?

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,247
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: "No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"
« Reply #2 on: March 20, 2013, 12:34:49 AM »
This is something I heard from this old man at my Church who was in the middle of a polemic rant about the Roman Catholic Church, and something that he--along with two other old men I know--said really stood out to me. He said that there is not even any historical evidence at all that St. Peter ever even traveled to Rome. This surprised me, because as far as I know, our Church tradition also says that he went to Rome, so I don't really see how this man could make this claim without slitting our own Church's throat. How much truth is there to this statement?

From the service to Apostles Peter and Paul:

With what spiritual songs should we praise Peter and Paul? The sharp mouths of the dread sword of the Spirit that slaughter godlessness; the radiant ornaments of Rome; the delights of the whole inhabited world; the reasoning tablets, written by God, of the New Testament, which in Zion Christ proclaimed, who has great mercy.

A joyous feast has shone out today on the ends of the earth, the all-honoured memorial of the wisest Apostles and their princes, Peter and Paul; and so Rome dances and rejoices. Let us also, brethren, celebrate in songs and psalms this all-revered day, as we cry out to them: Hail, Peter, Apostle and true friend of your teacher, Christ our God. Hail, Paul, well-loved, herald of the faith and teacher of the inhabited world. Holy pair, chosen by God, as you have boldness, implore Christ our God that our souls may be saved.

What dungeon did not hold you prisoner? What Church did not have you as an orator? Damascus extols you, O Paul, for it knew you blinded by the Light; and Rome, which received your blood, boasts in you; but Tarsus, your birthplace, rejoices yet more with love and honour. O Peter, rock of the Faith, and Paul, boast of the whole world, coming together from Rome, make us steadfast.



No longer posting here. Anyone is welcome to PM me or email me at the address in my profile.

Offline Nicene

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 619
Re: "No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"
« Reply #3 on: March 20, 2013, 03:20:56 AM »
If Iraneaus is to be trusted (and I think he is) Peter did indeed travel to rome and establish the Bishopric there with Saint Paul.


Iraneaus, Against Heresies, Book Three, Chapter Three, 2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.

3. The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spoke with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels. From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and may also understand the tradition of the Church, since this Epistle is of older date than these men who are now propagating falsehood, and who conjure into existence another god beyond the Creator and the Maker of all existing things. To this Clement there succeeded Evaristus. Alexander followed Evaristus; then, sixth from the apostles, Sixtus was appointed; after him, Telephorus, who was gloriously martyred; then Hyginus; after him, Pius; then after him, Anicetus. Soter having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius does now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the inheritance of the episcopate. In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth.

So there is evidence, its just a matter if whether or not the evidence is realiable.
Thank you.

Offline Nicene

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 619
Re: "No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2013, 03:29:51 AM »

I also don't recall any other author mentioning this in the second century, certaintly in Rome itself Clement in his epistle wrote of the apostles establishing deacons and Bishops  for the churches and its not so far a stretch based on other writings, IE IGnatius and clement that the Bishroprice could and probably most certaintly was established in Rome by Saint Peter.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2013, 03:30:30 AM by Nicene »
Thank you.

Offline Cyrillic

  • Arbiter Elegantiarum
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,782
  • Cyrillico est edere orbem universum
Re: "No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"
« Reply #5 on: March 20, 2013, 07:11:27 AM »
This is something I heard from this old man at my Church

Then he was wrong.

This surprised me, because as far as I know, our Church tradition also says that he went to Rome

You are right.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2013, 07:12:35 AM by Cyrillic »
"April is the cruellest month, breeding
lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
memory and desire, stirring
dull roots with spring rain."
-T.S. Eliot

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,849
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • Holy Trinity Orthodox Church
Re: "No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"
« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2013, 12:14:49 PM »
I heard that something similar, but the argument wasnt that Peter never went to Rome, but that he was never bishop, like he was in Antioch.
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,261
Re: "No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"
« Reply #7 on: March 20, 2013, 12:16:26 PM »
. . . something I heard from this old man at my Church who was in the middle of a polemic rant about the Roman Catholic Church . . . .

There is no way whatever follows cannot be awesome with a start like this.
Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,326
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: "No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"
« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2013, 03:31:02 PM »
Didn't Eusebius write that St. Peter went to Rome?

I was given to understand that there were a small community of Christians in Rome prior to St. Peter's arrival.

Offline jmbejdl

  • Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,480
  • Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava
Re: "No Evidence that Peter ever Went to Rome!"
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2013, 04:22:36 AM »
Didn't Eusebius write that St. Peter went to Rome?

I was given to understand that there were a small community of Christians in Rome prior to St. Peter's arrival.

To the best of my knowledge, you're correct. I'm also pretty sure that at the Apostolic Constitutions has St. Paul ordaining St. Linus as the first bishop of Rome and St. Peter only being involved later with the ordination of St. Clement. I don't think that there's any doubt that St. Peter was in Rome or that he was involved in its founding, but to describe him as the founder, or even worse, as the first Pope, would seem unsustainable.

James
We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos