In the latter part of the first century, Clement, bishop of
Rome, (Epistle I. to Corinth, § 5,) speaks of Paul and Peter as
persecuted, and dying as martyrs. But he does not say when, or
where. In the middle of the second century, Justin Martyr speaks
of Simon Magus, his magic and his deification, at Rome; but
makes no mention of Peter’s going to Rome, to combat him. Nor
does any other father, so far as I know, till after A. D. 300.
About twenty years after Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, (bishop of
Lyons,) wrote his five books against the heretics; in which he
confutes them, by the testimony of those churches which were
_said_ to have been founded immediately by the apostles. The
following extract from him will fully illustrate that mode of
reasoning, and also show us what Irenaeus knew of Peter’s being
at Rome. He says: “The doctrine preached to all the world by the
apostles, is now found in the church;――as all may see if they
are willing to learn; and we are able to name the persons whom
the apostles constituted the bishops of the churches, and their
successors down to our times; who have never taught or known any
such doctrine as the heretics advance. Now if the apostles had
been acquainted with [certain] recondite mysteries, which they
taught privately, and only to such as were the most perfect,
they would certainly have taught them to those men to whom they
committed the care of the churches; for they required them to
be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom they made
their successors and substitutes in office;――because, if they
conducted aright, great advantage would result; but if they
should go wrong, immense evils would ensue. But, as it would
be tedious, in the present work, to enumerate the successions
in all the churches, I will mention but one, viz. the greatest,
most ancient, and well-known by all, _the church founded and
established at Rome, by the two most glorious apostles, Peter
and Paul_. The faith of this church was the result of apostolic
teaching, and the same as was every where preached; and it has
come down to us through a succession of bishops; and by this
example we confound all those who, in any manner, either from
selfish views and vain glory, or from blindness to truth and
erroneous belief, hold forth false doctrine. For with this
church, on account of its superior pre-eminence, every other
church,――that is, the true believers every where,――must agree;
because, in it has ever been preserved the doctrine derived
immediately from the apostles, and which was every where
propagated. The blessed apostles having founded and instructed
this church, _committed the episcopacy of it to Linus_; who is
mentioned by Paul in his epistle to Timothy. Anacletus succeeded
Linus; and after him, the third bishop from the apostles, was
Clement, who saw the apostles themselves, and conferred with
them, while their preaching and instruction was still sounding
in his ears.” Irenaeus then enumerates the succeeding bishops,
down to Eleutherius, “who,” he says, “is now the twelfth bishop
from the apostles.” In the preceding section, Irenaeus tells
us that Matthew wrote his gospel “while Peter and Paul were
preaching, and founding the church at Rome.”
Here is full and explicit testimony, that Paul and Peter,
unitedly, preached and founded the church at Rome; and that they
constituted LINUS THE FIRST BISHOP there. The language _excludes
both Peter and Paul_,――and excludes both equally, _from the
episcopal chair at Rome_. “They committed the episcopacy to
Linus;” who was the first bishop, as Clement was the third,
and Eleutherius the twelfth. Contemporary with Irenaeus was
Dionysius, bishop of Corinth. In reply to a monitory letter
from the Romish church, of which Eusebius (Church History,
II. 25,) has preserved an extract, Dionysius says: “By this your
excellent admonition, you have united in one the planting, by
Peter and Paul, of the Romans and Corinthians. For both of them
coming to our Corinth, planted and instructed us;――and in like
manner, going to Italy together,――after teaching there, they
suffered martyrdom at the same time.” From this testimony we may
learn how and when Peter went to Rome; as well as what relation
he sustained to the church there. He and Paul came to Corinth
together; and when they had regulated and instructed that church,
they went on together to Italy, and did the same things at Rome
as before at Corinth. Now this, if true, must have been after
the captivity of Paul at Rome, mentioned in the book of Acts.
For Paul never went directly from Corinth to Rome before that
captivity, since he never was at Rome before he was carried
there a prisoner, in the year A. D. 62. But, if released in the
year 64, he might have visited Corinth afterwards, with Peter,
and then have traveled with him to Rome. To the church of Rome,
Peter and Paul sustained the same relation; and that was the
same as they had sustained to the church of Corinth, viz. that
of _apostolic teachers and founders_,――not that of ORDINARY
BISHOPS. That is, Peter was no more the bishop of Rome than
Paul was; and neither of them, any more the bishop of Rome than
both were bishops of Corinth. Dionysius likewise, here affirms,
that Peter and Paul suffered martyrdom “at the same time;” and
probably at Rome, where they last taught. That Rome was the
place is proved by Caius, a Romish ecclesiastic, about A. D. 200,
as quoted by Eusebius, (Church History, II. 25.) “I am able,”
says he, “to show the trophies [the sepulchers] of the apostles.
For if you will go to the Vatican, or along the Via Ostia, you
will find the trophies of those who established this church.”
The next father, Clement of Alexandria, (about A. D. 200,)
reports it as tradition, that Mark wrote his gospel at Rome,
while Peter was preaching there. (Eusebius, Church History,
VI. 14.) In the forepart of the third century, lived Tertullian,
a fervid and learned writer. He assailed the heretics with
the same argument as Irenaeus did. “Run over,” says he, “the
apostolic churches, in which the chairs of apostles still
preside in their places, and in which the autographs of their
epistles are still read. If you are near to Italy, you have Rome,
a witness for us; and how blessed a church is that on which
apostles poured out their whole doctrine, together with their
blood! where Peter equaled our Lord in his mode of suffering;
and where Paul was crowned, with the exit of John the Baptist.”
(De praescriptione haereticorum c. 36.) In another work he says:
“Let us see what the Romans hold forth; to whom Peter and Paul
imparted the gospel sealed with their own blood.” (adversus
Marcion, IV. c. 5.) Again he says: “Neither is there a disparity
between those whom John baptized in the Jordan, and Peter in the
Tiber.” (de Baptismo.) He moreover testifies that Peter suffered
in the reign of Nero, (Scorpiac. c. 15,) and that this apostle
ordained Clement bishop of Rome. (Praescriptione c. 32.) In the
middle of the third century, Cyprian of Carthage, writing to
the bishop of Rome, (Epistle 55, to Cornelius) calls the church
of Rome “the principal church;” and that where “Peter’s chair”
was;――and “whose faith was derived from apostolic preaching.”
In the end of the third century or the beginning of the fourth,
Lactantius (Divine Institutes, IV. c. 21,) speaks of “Peter
and Paul” as having wrought miracles, and uttered predictions
at Rome; and describes their prediction of the destruction
of Jerusalem. And in his work on the Deaths of Persecutors,
(chapter 2,) he says: “During the reign of Nero, Peter came to
Rome; and having wrought several miracles by the power of God,
which rested on him, he converted many to righteousness, and
erected a faithful and abiding temple for God. This became known
to Nero, who, learning that multitudes, not only at Rome but in
all other places, were abandoning idolatry and embracing the new
religion, and being hurried on to all sorts of cruelty by his
brutal tyranny, set himself, the first of all, to destroy this
religion, and to persecute the servants of God. So he ordered
Peter to be crucified and Paul to be beheaded.” I have now
detailed every important testimony which I could find in the
genuine works of the fathers, in the three first centuries. The
witnesses agree very well; and they relate nothing but what may
be true. They make Peter and Paul to go from Corinth to Rome,
in company, during the reign of Nero; and after preaching and
strengthening the church at Rome, and ordaining Linus to be
its first bishop,――both suffering martyrdom at Rome on the same
day; Peter being crucified and Paul decapitated. There is no
representation of Peter’s being any more bishop of Rome than
Paul was;――and Irenaeus in particular, expressly makes Linus the
first bishop, and to be ordained by the two apostles.
We now come to Eusebius, who wrote about A. D. 325. He quotes
most of the fathers above cited, but departs widely from them,
in regard to the time, and the occasion, of Peter’s going to
Rome. He says it was in the reign of Claudius;――and for the
purpose of opposing Simon Magus, (as the Clementine novels
represented the matter.) Yet he does not make Peter to be bishop
of Rome. The subsequent writers of the fourth and following
centuries, agree with Eusebius as to the time and the occasion
of Peter’s going to Rome; and most of them make Peter to be the
first bishop of Rome. According to them, Peter remained in Judea
only about four years after the ascension; then he was bishop
of Antioch seven years, and in the second year of Claudius,
A. D. 43, removed his chair to Rome, where he was bishop for
twenty-five years, or until his death, A. D. 68. And this is
the account generally given by the papists, quite down to the
present times.