Someone showed me this article: http://www.historicist.com/articles2/peter.htm

Could someone please help me through all these 'proofs'...some of them I've come across before but others I don't really understand.

-- Jacob R. (jacobrainey@hotmail.com), January 28, 2004

Answers

The site is ridiculous! I don't have time to doit but I'm sure someone (hopefully Gail or Bill) will go through line by line and desamate it.

I am mainly just bumping it to the New Answers page.

Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), January 28, 2004.

Hello Jacob,

I would like to go through a point-by-point refutation of these proofs but that would take all afternoon and my seminary schedule keeps me pretty busy. But you may want to visit Catholic Answers (www.catholic.com) where they have information that directly addresses this topic (see, for example, "Was Peter in Rome?").

But before I sign off I will make soem brief comments:

1) Certain Protestants have been trying for 500 years to "prove" that Peter was not the first Bishop of Rome, and the Church has successfully defended its position concerning Peter for 500 years. Nevertheless the debates continue, as I suspect it will for quite some time.

2) It is sometimes irritating to hear non-Catholics try to dictate to us what our history is.

3) The person who compiled the "10 Proofs" you came across seems to think that the New Testament was written according to the modern standards of investigative journalism. It was not, nor was any other ancient writing. It was written as a testimony of faith with a historical component; it was not written as a history textbook. In other words, the Bible will not always give you all the facts. And yet the author of the "10 Proofs" seem to expect the New Testament to give us a complete biography of Peter in terms of who/what/when/where/how/why? To him, if it's not in the New Testament then it did not happen. Much of Catholic history, just like all other kinds of history, has been handed down in oral as well as written forms.

4) The author also seems to think that "apostle to the Gentiles" equates "bishop to the Gentiles." Apostle means "to be sent." There are plenty examples throughout Christian history of missionaries who were sent out and they founded churches in pagan areas. This did not make those missionaries bishops.

5) Concerning the author's statement that Peter was in Babylon and not Rome. I will quote from the Navarre Bible Commentary (from the book Catholic Epistles, pg. 120, concerning 1Pet 5:13):

"'Babylon:' this is a symbolic way of referring to Rome, the prototype of the idolatrous and worldly city of the era."

No doubt anti-Catholics will reject this and say that when Peter went to Babylon, he went to the place where the ancient kingdom of Babylon stood. In other words, they will say that the Babylon Peter talks about in 1Pet is not Rome.

But the funny thing is that many of these same people will say that the Babylon described in Revelation (ex, Rev 17:5) IS Rome! I wish these guys would make up their minds.

God bless, -Deacon Eric

-- Deacon Eric (erfilmer@hotmail.com), January 28, 2004.

even a non-theologian like myself has the common sense to see the unsubstantiated claims at this website.

for example:

PROOF SEVEN: When Paul finally arrived at Rome, the first thing he did was to summon "the chief of the Jews together" (Acts 28:17)...

But what is amazing is that these chief Jewish elders claimed they knew very little even about the basic teachings of Christ. All they knew was that "...everywhere it is spoken against" (Verse 22). Then Paul began to explain to them the basic teachings of Christ on the Kingdom of God. Some believed - the majority didn't.

Now, what does all this mean? [Peter] had been preaching constantly in Rome for 14 long years before this time, AND WAS STILL THERE -- how could these Jewish leaders have known so little about even the basic truths of Christianity? This again is clear proof Peter had not been in Rome prior to 59 A.D.

clear proof? you know, this was in an age where paper print, radio, and the internet were unheard of. it may have taken YEARS for news of an upstart new philosophy to take hold! one cannot deny, also, that there were many other religious sects competing for the attention of the masses.

Also, possibly peter had to keep a low profile in the capital of the empire. "...everywhere it is spoken against". this must mean that the government and wary romans began to raise an eyebrow to the christians' ministry, and felt threatened by something like this that would shake their own beliefs.

the website lists other "facts" that may not be refuted. so far, though, im skeptical. im sure the firebrands who post here will have something to say, and i eagerly anticipate their posts. (hi, dano!)

-- jas (jas_r_22@hotmail.com), January 28, 2004.

Take it from a Reformed (Protestant)minister, don't waste your time. It's a silly site. It has nothing to do with Reformation concerns regarding papal authority. It appears to be an anti-Catholic site (i.e., the purpose is to demean Catholicisim rather than explain Reformed/Protestant beliefs or encourage conversation between Protestants and Catholics).

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), January 28, 2004.

Jacob, You probably don't understand them because some of them really don't make that much logical sense as a 'proof'. If you have personal questions you really have with the Catholic faith, we will be glad to answer them or direct you to a thread where they have been answered before. Just ignore the site.

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), January 28, 2004.

Robert, Explaining Protestant beliefs is synonymous to demeaning Catholicism. Do not downplay the injury. How can a protestant fully explain his beliefs without robbing St. Peter of his legitimate place in the Body of Christ?

-- W. Wade (W_Wade2004@yahoo.com), January 28, 2004.

Jacob, I think the best thing for you to do is to study the truths found in the writings of the fathers themselves, rather than rely on what someone claims they said. Then when you come upon the phoney baloney, you will know it instantaneously.

For instance, here just a few quotes from the Fathers concerning the Primacy of Peter. There are numerous others, but in the interest of saving space I just chose a few.

"Peter was proncounced blessed by the Lord...the duty of feeding the spiritual sheep of the Church under whose protecting shield, this Apostolic Church of his has NEVER turned away from the path of truth in ANY direction of ERROR, whose AUTHORITY, as that of the Prince of all the Apostles, the whole Catholic Church and the Ecumenical Synods have faithfully embraced..." Agatho Pope,To Ecumenical Council VI at Constantinople,(A.D. 680),in NPNF2,XIV:328-339

"It was right indeed that he(Paul) should be anxious to see Peter; for he was the first among the apostles, and was entrusted by the Savior with the care of the churches." Ambrosiaster,Commentary on Galatians,PL 17:344 (A.D. 384),in SPP,62

" 'Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church', Wherefore where Peter the Church is..." Ambrose,Commentary on the Psalms,40:30 (AD 395),in DOP,184

"At length, after being tempted by the devil, Peter is set over the Church." Ambrose,Commentary on the Psalms,43:40(AD 397),in GILES,145

"...the chief of the disciples...the Lord accepted him, set him up as the foundation, called him the rock and structure of the church." Aphraates, De Paenitentibus Homily 7:15(A.D. 337),in SPP,58

"In order that he may show his power, God has endowed none of his disciples with gifts like Peter. But, having raised him with heavenly gifts, he has set him above all. And, as first disciple and greater among the brethren, he has shown, by the test of deeds, the power of the Spirit. The first to be called, he followed at once....The Saviour confided to this man, as some special trust, the whole universal Church, after having asked him three times 'Lovest thou me?'. And he receive the world in charge..." Asterius,Homily 8(A.D. 400),in GILES,145-146

"Number the priests even from that seat of Peter. And in that order of fathers see to whom succeeded: that is the rock which the proud gates of hades do not conquer." Augustine,Psalmus contr Partem Donati(A.D. 393),in GILES,182

"Peter bore the person of the church" Augustine, Sermon 149:7(inter A.D. 391-430),in SPP,69

"Peter upon which rock the Lord promised that he would build his church." Basil,In Isaias,2:66(A.D. 375),in SPP,55

"Peter is again called 'the coryphaeus of the Apostles" Basil of Seleucia,Oratio 25(ante A.D. 468),in FOC,II:49

" 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and to thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven'? When Wilfrid spoken thus, the king said, 'It is true, Colman, that these words were spoken to Peter by our Lord?' He answered, 'It is true O king!' Then says he, 'Can you show any such power given to your Columba?' Colman answered, 'None.' Then added the king,"Do you both agree that these words were principally directed to Peter, and that the keys of heaven were given to him by our Lord?'They both answered,'We do.' " Bede Venerable, AD 700, Ecclesiastical History,3:5(A.D. 700),in RCH,I:271

"[B]ut that great man, the disciple of disciples, that master among masters, who wielding the government of the Roman Church possessed the authority in faith and priesthood. Tell us therefore, tell us we beg of you, Peter, prince of the Apostles, tell us how the churches must believe in God." Cassian John,Contra Nestorium,3:12(A.D. 430),in SPP,61

*****

Here are few quotes on the primacy of the "church at Rome" by the Fathers.

"The church of God which sojourns at Rome to the church of God which sojourns at Corinth ... But if any disobey the words spoken by him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger." Clement of Rome,Pope,1st Epistle to the Corinthians,1,59:1 (c.A.D. 96),in GILES,1-2

"Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Mast High God the Father, and of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is sanctified and enlightened by the will of God, who farmed all things that are according to the faith and love of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour; the Church which presides in the place of the region of the Romans, and which is worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of credit, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love..." Ignatius of Antioch,Epistle to the Romans, Prologue (A.D. 110), in ANF,I:73

"There is extant also another epistle written by Dionysius to the Romans, and addressed to Soter, who was bishop at that time. We cannot do better than to subjoin some passages from this epistle, in which he commends the practice of the Romans which has been retained down to the persecution in our own days. His words are as follows: For from the beginning it has been your practice to do good to all the brethren in various ways, and to send contributions to many churches in every city. Thus relieving the want of the needy, and making provision for the brethren in the mines by the gifts which you have sent from the beginning, you Romans keep up the hereditary customs of the Romans, which your blessed bishop Soter has not only maintained, but also added to, furnishing an abundance of supplies to the saints, and encouraging the brethren from abroad with blessed words, as a loving father his children.' In this same epistle he makes mention also of Clement's epistle to the Corinthians, showing that it had been the custom from the beginning to read it in the church. His words are as follows: To-day we have passed the Lord's holy day, in which we have read your epistle. From it, whenever we read it, we shall always be able to draw advice, as also from the former epistle, which was written to us through Clement.' The same writer also speaks as follows concerning his own epistles, alleging that they had been mutilated: As the brethren desired me to write epistles, I wrote. And these epistles the apostles of the devil have filled with tares, cutting out some things and adding others. For them a woe is reserved. It is, therefore, not to be wondered at if some have attempted to adulterate the Lord's writings also, since they have formed designs even against writings which are of less accounts.' " Dionysius of Corinth,To Pope Soter(A.D. 171),Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History,4:23,in NPNF2:1:200-202

"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 pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere." Irenaeus,Against Heresies,3:3:2 (A.D. 180),in ANF,I:1415-416

"A question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Saviour's passover. It was therefore necessary to end their fast on that day, whatever day of the week it should happen to be. But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time, as they observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the resurrection of our Saviour...Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the common unity the parishes of all Asia, with the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there wholly excommunicate.But this did not please all the bishops. And they besought him to consider the things of peace, and of neighborly unity and love. Words of theirs are extant, sharply rebuking Victor. Among them was Irenaeus, who, sending letters in the name of the brethren in Gaul over whom he presided, maintained that the mystery of the resurrection of the Lord should be observed only on the Lord's day. He fittingly admonishes Victor that he should not cut off whole churches of God which observed the tradition of an ancient custom ..." Pope Victor & Easter(c.A.D. 195),Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History 5:23,24,in NPNF2,I:241-243

"And he says to him again after the resurrection, 'Feed my sheep.' It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church's) oneness. No doubt the others were all that Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, and it is (thus) made clear that there is but one flock which is to be fed by all the apostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church? This unity firmly should we hold and maintain, especially we bishops, presiding in the Church, in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be the one and undivided." Cyprian,The Unity of the Church,4-5 (Primacy Text,A.D. 251/256),NE,228-229

"After such things as these, moreover, they still dare--a false bishop having been appointed for them by, heretics--to set sail and to bear letters from schismatic and profane persons to the throne of Peter, and to the chief church whence priestly unity takes its source; and not to consider that these were the Romans whose faith was praised in the preaching of the apostle, to whom faithlessness could have no access." Cyprian,To Cornelius,Epistle 54/59:14(A.D. 252),in ANF,V:344

"For Dionysius, Bishop of Rome, having written also against those who said that the Son of God was a creature and a created thing, it is manifest that not now for the first time but from of old the heresy of the Arian adversaries of Christ has been anathematised by all. And Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, making his defence concerning the letter he had written, appears in his turn as neither thinking as they allege, nor having held the Arian error at all." Athanasius,Dionysius of Rome,13 (A.D. 352),in NPNF2,IV:180

"Supposing, as you assert, that some offence rested upon those persons, the case ought to have been conducted against them, not after this manner, but according to the Canon of the Church. Word should have been written of it to us all , that so a just sentence might prceed from all. For the sufferers were Bishops, and Churches of no ordinary note, but those which the Apostles themselves had governed in their own persons. And why was nothing said to us concerning the Church of the Alexandrians in particular? Are you ignorant that the custom has been for word to be written first to us, and then for a just decision to be passed from this place? If then any such suspicion rested upon the Bishop there, notice thereof ought to have been sent to the Church of this place; whereas, after neglecting to inform us, and proceeding on their own authority as they pleased, now they desire to obtain our concurrence in their decisions, though we never condemned him. Not so have the constitutions of Paul, not so have the traditions of the Fathers directed; this is another form of procedure, a novel practice. I beseech you, readily bear with me: what I write is for the common good. For what we have received from the blessed Apostle Peter, that I signify to you; and I should not have written this, as deeming that these things were manifest unto all men, had not these proceedings so disturbed us." Athanasius,Pope Julius to the Eusebians,Defense Against the Arians, 35 (A.D. 347),in NPNF2,IV:118

Athanasius attended and sanctioned the deliberations of the Council of Sardica and referred to the Council of Sardica as "the great Council" (Defense Against the Arians 1) or "the Holy Synod" (Letter to the People of Antioch 5)

"Bishop Hosius said: This also it is necessary to add, that no bishop pass from his own province to another province in which there are bishops, unless indeed he be called by his brethren, that we seem not to close the gates of charity. And this case likewise is to be provided for, that if in any province a bishop has some matter against his brother and fellow-bishop, neither of the two should call in as arbiters bishops from another province. But if perchance sentence be given against a bishop in any matter and he supposes his case to be not unsound but good, in order that the question may be reopened, let us, if it seem good to your charity, honour the memory of Peter the Apostle, and let those who gave judgment write to Julius, the bishop of Rome, so that, if necessary, the case may be retried by the bishops of the neighbouring provinces and let him appoint arbiters; but if it cannot be shown that his case is of such a sort as to need a new trial, let the judgment once given not be annulled, but stand good as before." Council of Sardica,Canon III (A.D. 343/344),in NPNF2,XIV:416-417

"Bishop Gaudentius said: If it seems good to you, it is necessary to add to this decision full of sincere charity which thou hast pronounced, that if any bishop be deposed by the sentence of these neighbouring bishops, and assert that he has fresh matter in defence, a new bishop be not settled in his see, unless the bishop of Rome judge and render a decision as to this." Council of Sardica,Canon IV (A.D. 343/344),in NPNF2,XIV:418

"Bishop Hosius said: Decreed, that if any bishop is accused, and the bishops of the same region assemble and depose him from his office, and he appealing, so to speak, takes refuge with the most blessed bishop of the Roman church, and he be willing to give him a hearing, and think it right to renew the examination of his case, let him be pleased to write to those fellow-bishops who are nearest the province that they may examine the particulars with care and accuracy and give their votes on the matter in accordance with the word of truth. And if any one require that his case be heard yet again, and at his request it seem good to move the bishop of Rome to send presbyters a latere, let it be in the power of that bishop, according as he judges it to be good and decides it to be right that some be sent to be judges with the bishops and invested with his authority by whom they were sent. And be this also ordained. But if he think that the bishops are sufficient for the examination and decision of the matter let him do what shall seem good in his most prudent judgment. The bishops answered: What has been said is approved." Council of Sardica,Canon V (A.D. 343/344),in NPNF2,XIV:419

"What we have always believed, that we now know, for experience is proving and confirming for each of us what he has heard with his ears. It is true what the Apostle Paul, the most blessed teacher of the Gentiles, said of himself: 'Do ye seek a proof of him who speaks in me?' For, since the Lord Christ dwelt in him, there can be no doubt that the Spirit spoke by through his soul and animated the instrument of his body. And thus you, dearly beloved brother, though distant in body, have been with us in unison of mind and will. The reason for your absence was both honorable and imperative, that the schismatic wolves might not rob and plunder by stealth nor the heretical dogs bark madly in the rapid fury nor the very serpent, the devil, discharge his blasphemous venom. So it seems to us right and altogether fitting that priests of the Lord from each and every province should report to their head, that is, to the See of Peter, the Apostle." Council of Sardica,To Pope Julius (A.D. 342),as cited by James T. Shotwell and Louise Ropes Loomis The See of Peter (New York:Columbia,1927),pp.527-528.

"You cannot deny that you know that in the city of Rome the Chair was first conferred on Peter, in which the prince of all the Apostles, Peter,sat ... in which Chair unity should be preserved by all, so that he should now be a schismatic and a sinner who should set up another Chair against that unique one." Optatus of Mileve,The Schism of Donatists,2:2-3 (c.A.D. 367),in GCC,55

"For the good of unity Blessed Peter deserved to be preferred before the rest, and alone received the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, that he might communicate them to the rest." Optatus of Mileve,The Schism of Donatists,7:3 (c.A.D. 367),in GCC,50

"Yet, at the very outset, error was so far set right by the bishops on whom the attempt was made at Ariminum to compel them to manipulate or innovate on the faith, that they confessed themselves seduced by opposite arguments, or owned that they had not perceived any contradiction to the opinion of the Fathers livered at Nicaea. No prejudice could arise from the number of bishops gathered at Ariminum, since it is well known that neither the bishop of the Romans, whose opinion ought before all others to have been waited for, nor Vincentius, whose stainless episcopate had lasted so many years, nor the rest, gave in their adhesion to such doctrines. And this is the more significant, since, as has been already said, the very men who seemed to be tricked into surrender, themselves, in their wiser moments, testified their disapproval." Pope Damasus[regn. A.D. 366-384],About Council at Arminum,Epistle 1 (A.D. 371),in Theodoret's Church History,in NPNF2,III:83

*****

You see, Jacob, anti-Catholic bigots love to try to distort history to their own advantage. They may be able to find one little quote here or there to feed the flames of their bigotry. Usually, however, you will find they have taken their quotes out of context (if they even provide one), and poured their own meanings into it.

For further reading of the fathers, go here ccel.org. You will find literally volumes of writings from the 1st century on BY THE FATHERS THEMSELVES.

For quotes already broken down by topic, go here. tttp://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/primacy.htm This cite is awesome! Joseph Gallegos has spent the time and energy to break down the quotes by "Catholic topic," in order to equip Catholics in defending their faith. The quotes I provided above come from his site.

Gail

P.S. If someone didn't already mention this, SCRIPTURE IS ABUNDANTLY clear. Peter was given the keys, Peter was given the Shepherd's Mantle, Peter was called "the rock" upon which this church is to be built.

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), January 28, 2004.

The only eviden from antiquity is from the expurious Acts of peter where Agrippa ordrs Peter's execution. Agrippa II was King until AD 70 of what is now Israel. Acts Of Peter.

So Peter was not at Rome.

Babylon was inhabited in the first century AD. Though Babylon is used for Rome in Revelation it cannot be infered 100% it is Rome.

The ChristianYahwist

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), January 28, 2004.

I beg to differ with you, Elpidio.

'You have thus by such an admonition bound together the plantings of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth." Dionysius of Corinth, Epistle to Pope Soter,fragment in Eusebius' Church History,II:25(c.A.D. 178),in NPNF2,I:130

"Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome,and laying the foundations of the Church." Irenaeus,Against Heresies,3:1:1(c.A.D. 180),in ANF,I:414

"As Peter had preached the Word publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had followed him for a long time and remembered his sayings, should write them out." Clement of Alexandria, fragment in Eusebius Church History,VI:14,6(A.D. 190), in NPNF2,I:261

"Through envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death. Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him. " Clement of Rome,The First Epistle of Clement,5(c.A.D. 96),in ANF,I:6

'We read the lives of the Caesars: At Rome Nero was the first who stained with blood the rising blood. Then is Peter girt by another(an allusion to John 21:18), when he is made fast to the cross." Tertullian, Scorpiace,15:3(A.D. 212),in ANF,III:648

"[W]hat utterance also the Romans give, so very near(to the apostles), to whom Peter and Paul conjointly bequeathed the gospel even sealed with their own blood." Tertullian, Against Marcion,4:5 (inter A.D. 207-212),in ANF,III:350

"It is, therefore, recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and that Peter likewise was crucified under Nero. This account of Peter and Paul is substantiated by the fact that their names are preserved in the cemeteries of that place even to the present day. It is confirmed likewise by Caius, a member of the Church, who arose under Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome. He, in a published disputation with Proclus, the leader of the Phrygian heresy, speaks as follows concerning the places where the sacred corpses of the aforesaid apostles are laid: 'But I can show the trophies of the apostles. For if you will go to the Vatican or to the Ostian way, you will find the trophies of those who laid the foundations of this church.' " Gaius, fragment in Eusebius' Church History,2:25(A.D. 198),in NPNF2,I:129-130

"Peter...at last, having come to Rome, he was crucified head- downwards; for he had requested that he might suffer this way." Origen,Third Commentary on Genesis,(A.D. 232) fragment in Eusebius 3:1:1,in NPNF2,X:132

"Thus Peter, the first of the Apostles, having been often apprehended, and thrown into prison, and treated with igominy, was last of all crucified at Rome." Peter of Alexandria,The Canonical Epistle,Canon 9(A.D. 306),in ANF,VI:273

"[W]hich Peter and Paul preached at Rome..." Lactantius,The Divine Institutes,4:21(A.D. 310),in ANF,VII:123

"Peter...coming to the city of Rome, by the mighty cooperation of that power which was lying in wait there..." Eusebius,Ecclesiastical History,II:14,5 (A.D. 325),in NPNF2,X:115

"This man[Simon Magus],after he had been cast out by the Apostles,came to Rome...Peter and Paul,a noble pair,chief rulers of the Church, arrived and set the error right...For Peter was there, who carrieth the keys of heaven..." Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,6:14-15(c.A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:37-38

"And Peter, who had hid himself for fear of the Jews, and the Apostle Paul who was let down in a basket, and fled, when they were told, 'Ye must bear witness at Rome,' deferred not the journey; yea, rather, they departed rejoicing..." Athanasius,Defence of his Flight,18 (c.A.D. 357),in NPNF2,IV:261

"I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul...My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross." Jerome,To Pope Damasus,Epistle 15 (A.D. 377),in NPNF2,VI:18

"Where the Cherubim sing the glory, where the Seraphim are flying, there shall we see Paul, with Peter, and as a chief and leader of the choir of the Saints, and shall enjoy his generous love. For if when here he loved men so, that when he had the choice of departing and being with Christ, he chose to be here, much more will he there display a warmer affection. I love Rome even for this, although indeed one has other grounds for praising it, both for its greatness, and its antiquity, and its beauty, and its populousness, and for its power, and its wealth, and for its successes in war. But I let all this pass, and esteem it blessed on this account, that both in his lifetime he wrote to them, and loved them so, and talked with them whiles he was with us, and brought his life to a close there. Wherefore the city is more notable upon this ground, than upon all others together. And as a body great and strong, it hath as two glistening eyes the bodies of these Saints. Not so bright is the heaven, when the sun sends forth his rays, as is the city of Rome, sending out these two lights into all parts of the world. From thence will Paul be caught up, from thence Peter. Just bethink you, ... what a sight Rome will see, when Paul ariseth suddenly from that deposit, together with Peter, and is lifted up to meet the Lord. What a rose will Rome send up to Christ! what two crowns will the city have about it! what golden chains will she be girded with! what fountains possess! Therefore I admire the city, not for the much gold, not for the columns, not for the other display there, but for these pillars of the Church." Chrysostom,Epistle to the Romans,Homily 32 (c.A.D. 391),in NPNFI,XI:561-562

"Which was mere to the interest of the Church at Rome, that it should at its commencement be presided over by some high-born and pompous senator, or by the fisherman Peter, who had none of this world's advantages to attract men to him?" Gregory of Nyssa,To the Church at Nicodemia,Epistle 13 (ante A.D. 394),NPNF2,V:535

"For if the lineal succession of bishops is to be taken into account, with how much more certainty and benefit to the Church do we reckon back till we reach Peter himself, to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the Lord said: 'Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it !' The successor of Peter was Linus, and his successors in unbroken continuity were these: -- Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Iginus, Anicetus, Pius, Soter, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop Anastasius. In this order of succession no Donatist bishop is found. But, reversing the natural course of things, the Donatists sent to Rome from Africa an ordained bishop, who, putting himself at the head of a few Africans in the great metropolis, gave some notoriety to the name of 'mountain men,' or Cutzupits, by which they were known." Augustine,To Fortunatus,Epistle 53(A.D. 400),in NPNFI,I:298

"But some people in some countries of the West, and especially in the city,[ie. Rome] not knowing the reason of this indulgence, think that a dispensation from fasting ought certainly not to be allowed On the Sabbath, because they say that on this day the Apostle Peter fasted before his encounter with Simon[Magus]." John Cassian,Institutes,X (ante A.D. 435),in NPNF2,XI:218

Some non-Catholic historians

"Some Protestant controversialists have asserted that Peter was never in Rome...I think the historical probability is that he was...Protestant champions had undertaken the impossible task of proving the negative, that Peter was never in Rome. They might as well have undertaken to prove out of the Bible that St. Bartholomew never preached in Pekin...For myself, I am willing, in absence of any opposing tradition, to accept the current account that Peter suffered martyrdom at Rome. If Rome, which early laid claim to have witnessed that martrydom, were not the scene of it, where then did it take place? Any city would be glad to claim such a connexion with the name of the Apostle, and none but Rome made the claim...If this evidence for Peter's martydom be not be deemed sufficient, there are few things in the history of the early Church which it will be possible to demonstrate" G. Salmon "Infallibilty of the Church" (Grand Rapids:Baker,1959) pp. 348-9(a critic of the Catholic faith)

"...to deny the Roman stay of Peter is an error which today is clear to every scholar who is not blind. The Martyr death of Peter at Rome was once contested by reason of Protestant prejudice.' A. Harnack

'It is sufficient to let us include the martyrdom of Peter in Rome in our final historical picture of the early Church, as a matter of fact which is relatively though not absolutely assured. We accept it, however facts of antiquity that are universally accepted as historical. Were we to demand for all facts of ancient history a greater degree of probability, we should have to strike from our history books a large portion of their contents." Oscar Cullman "Peter, Disciple, Apostle, Martyr" (London:SCM,1962) p. 114

"That Peter and Paul were the most eminent of many Christians who suffered martyrdom in Rome under Nero is certain..." F.F. Bruce "NT History" (New York:Doubleday,1971) p. 410

"It seems certain that Peter spent his closing years in Rome" JND Kelly "The Oxford Dictionary of Popes" (Oxford:Oxford,1986) p. 6

"The martrydom of both Peter and Paul in Rome...has often been questioned by Protestant critics, some of whom have contended that Peter was never in Rome. But the archeaological researches of the Protestant Historian Hans Lietzmann, supplemented by the library study of the Protestant exegete Oscar Cullman, have made it extremely difficult to deny the tradition of Peter's death in Rome under the emperor Nero. The account of Paul's martydom in Rome, which is supported by much of the same evidence, has not called forth similar skepticism." Jaroslav Pelikan, "The Riddle of Catholicism", (New York:Abingdon,1959) p. 36

All quotes taken from Joseph Gallegos's website, as mentioned in above post.

Gail

P.S. I might add, that countless times I have been panicked by something I heard or read by an anti-Catholic bigot, only to find out after careful examination, the red herring was nothing but a clever ruse meant to steal, kill and destroy the TRUTH!

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), January 28, 2004.

This site was inspired by the devil to deceive us Roman Catholics. We do not have to debate on that. The devil can use Scripture. This is the most ridiculous and enraging heresy I have encountered after Arius and Nestorius!!!

-- A.Flores (igithegreat@yahoo.com), April 12, 2004.