The question of whether the apostle Peter ever visited the city of Rome has been debated by scholars for centuries. The Bible itself does not provide a definitive answer, but there are several clues from Scripture and early church history that can help shed light on this issue.
Biblical Evidence
The Bible does not contain an explicit record of Peter traveling to Rome. However, there are a few passages that may suggest a connection between Peter and the church at Rome:
- In Paul’s letter to the Romans, he sends greetings to members in the Roman church, including “Mark, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke, my fellow workers” (Romans 16:14). Since Mark had connections to Peter (1 Peter 5:13), this could imply some overlap between the Roman church and Peter’s circle.
- At the end of Acts, Paul is under house arrest in Rome for two years, welcoming all visitors. It’s plausible that Peter could have been one of these visitors at some point (Acts 28:30-31).
- In 1 Peter 5:13, Peter writes “She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark.” Some scholars believe “Babylon” functions as symbolic language for the city of Rome.
- Peter and Paul were both key leaders in the early church. Acts implies that they were in Jerusalem together at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15), so it’s reasonable to assume their paths crossed in other important church centers like Rome.
While intriguing, none of these clues provide definitive evidence that Peter traveled to Rome. The earliest unambiguous written testimony about Peter’s presence in Rome comes a few decades after the apostolic era, in the letters of Ignatius and 1 Clement.
Early Church Testimony
Several writings from the late 1st and early 2nd centuries A.D. mention Peter’s connection to the church at Rome:
- Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, wrote a letter to the Romans on his way to martyrdom in Rome sometime between 98-117 A.D. He noted that he could not command them as Peter and Paul had, implying a historical presence of the apostles in Rome.
- Dionysius, bishop of Corinth around 170 A.D., claimed that Peter and Paul together founded the church at Rome and appointed Linus as bishop.
- Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons around 180 A.D., wrote that Matthew wrote his gospel while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and founding the church.
- Clement, bishop of Rome around 96 A.D., wrote a letter to the Corinthian church alluding to Peter’s martyrdom in Rome.
While these testimonies come decades after the lives of the apostles, the fact that they originate independently from various regions increases their credibility. There is no extant historical evidence from the first two centuries explicitly denying or contradicting Peter’s presence in Rome.
Peter as First Bishop of Rome?
The above sources demonstrate an early belief that Peter spent time in Rome, but some church traditions go further and claim that Peter served as the first bishop of Rome. This belief is rooted primarily in the following:
- Jesus designated Peter as the rock on which he would build his church (Matthew 16:18). As the preeminent apostle, early Christians inferred Peter would have naturally led in key church centers like Rome.
- As bishop of Rome, Clement asserted authority by implying he held Peter’s office.
- Later church fathers like Cyprian and Jerome taught that Peter was the first bishop of Rome, though offering limited historical justification.
However, there are several problems with the idea that Peter served as bishop of Rome:
- The New Testament never explicitly states Peter assumed any formal leadership of the Roman church community.
- 1 Peter 5:1-2 describes Peter functioning as an “elder” not a monarchical bishop.
- Church structure in the New Testament period was still nascent and fluid. The concept of a monarchical episcopate would emerge more clearly later on.
- Even if Peter spent time in Rome, that doesn’t necessitate he functioned as bishop in any official capacity.
So while Peter may have visited and preached in Rome along with other apostles like Paul, the historical record is too sparse to definitively conclude he served as the first monarchical bishop. The Roman Catholic doctrine of papal succession stemming from Peter appears to be more theological than historical in origin.
Martyrdom in Rome
According to church tradition, Peter was martyred in Rome. The key sources for this claim are:
- Clement’s letter to the Corinthians (c.96 A.D.) refers to Peter’s martyrdom, though without specifying a location.
- Ignatius and Dionysius state Peter was martyred in Rome, writing around 100 A.D. and 170 A.D. respectively.
- John Chrysostom (c.390 A.D.) and other later church fathers mention Peter’s crucifixion in Rome.
The specifics and dating of Peter’s death in Rome have been debated, but most scholars accept the basic tradition that Peter died as a martyr in Rome.
However, there are a few issues worth noting:
- The Bible nowhere mentions Peter’s presence or death in Rome.
- 1 Clement and Ignatius are the earliest unambiguous sources, both writing 30-50 years after Peter’s death.
- Some details of Peter’s martyrdom emerge quite late, calling into question their accuracy. For example, the claim that Peter was crucified upside down first appears in the Acts of Peter (c.180-190 A.D.).
So while Peter’s martyrdom in Rome is considered plausible based on cumulative ancient testimony, the precise details are uncertain and not rooted in any biblical account.
Evaluation of the Evidence
In evaluating the historical evidence, we can make several observations:
- The Bible contains no definitive claim about Peter visiting Rome, but hints it was possible.
- From the late 1st through 2nd centuries, multiple independent sources affirm Peter’s presence and martyrdom in Rome.
- Details about dates, interactions, and role in the Roman church emerge later and are more speculative.
- The tradition of Peter as the first bishop in Rome develops even later and is rooted in theological assumptions about apostolic authority.
In summary, while the Bible leaves open the possibility, the cumulative weight of the historical evidence makes it highly likely that Peter spent time ministering and was eventually martyred in Rome, along with other apostles like Paul. But later Catholic traditions about his rank and length of residence are more difficult to conclusively establish.
The exact details of Peter’s time in Rome may remain shrouded in mystery. But for those exploring the early foundations of the Roman church, the apostle Peter appears to have played a key role along with Paul in establishing what would become one of the most significant Christian communities in the ancient world.