Toto

This was posted on the Newswire:

St Peter was not the first Pope and never went to Rome, claims Channel 4Catholic theologians responded by calling the charges rubbish, intellectually challenged, and comparing this documentary to the Da Vinci Code.

Channel 4 site

Profile of Robert Beckford, a theologian from a Carribbean Pentacostal background, who has produced some controversial programs before.

Roger Pearse

I have an idea that Channel 4 won't mark Ramadan, tho, by putting up a stooge to rubbish Islam. Perhaps I am too cynical.

2-J

No doubt true, but - in the case of this program at least, having watched it - I wouldn't say it 'rubbished' christianity. The guy seemed sincere enough. Isn't the evidence that Peter made it to Rome shaky at best?

My only objection to what I saw on the program was that the alternative grave theory would seem to have even less going for it than the Rome grave theory.

Roger Pearse

Mmm, well, arguing that a central plank of Roman Catholicism is bogus on the day of its most important feast may not be something that would be directed at more favoured groups.

Beckford is for hire, I'm afraid.

No, I agree. The evidence is limited, but as far as I know, what evidence there is points to Rome, and there seems no pressing reason to question it. Why should we doubt it, after all? Cussedness? Anti-Catholicism?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Amaleq13

In the context of a comparison to Islam, I would suggest that "more feared" is more apropos.

aa5874

What evidence is there for the Rome grave theory? The death of Peter is not recorded anywhere in the NT at all. The Epistles of Peter were written up to 80 years after the supposed death of the very same Peter.

How did Peter manage to write Epistles from his grave?

See www.earlychristianwritings.com

2-J

Well I'm no NT scholar, so I'll have to let wikipedia do my research for me.

From wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Peter

"The early writings indicated in the following paragraphs witness to the tradition that Peter, probably at the time of the Great Fire of Rome of the year 64, for which the Emperor Nero blamed the Christians, met martyrdom in Rome.

- Clement of Rome, in his Letter to the Corinthians (Chapter 5), written c. 80-98, speaks of Peter's martyrdom in the following terms: "Let us take the noble examples of our own generation. Through jealousy and envy the greatest and most just pillars of the Church were persecuted, and came even unto death… Peter, through unjust envy, endured not one or two but many labours, and at last, having delivered his testimony, departed unto the place of glory due to him."

- Saint Ignatius of Antioch, in his Letter to the Romans (Ch. 4) of c. 105-110, tells the Roman Christians: "I do not command you, as Peter and Paul did."

- Dionysius of Corinth wrote: "You [Pope Soter] have also, by your very admonition, brought together the planting that was made by Peter and Paul at Rome and at Corinth; for both of them alike planted in our Corinth and taught us; and both alike, teaching similarly in Italy, suffered martyrdom at the same time" (Letter to Pope Soter [A.D. 170], in Eusebius, History of the Church 2:25:8).

-St. Irenaeus of Lyon (a disciple of St. Polycarp of Smyrna, who was himself a disciple of the Apostle St. John, which puts Irenaeus not far from the authentic teachings of the Apostles) in c. 175-185 wrote in Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter III, paragraphs 2–3) "Since, however, it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition."

-Tertullian also writes: "But if you are near Italy, you have Rome, where authority is at hand for us too. What a happy church that is, on which the apostles poured out their whole doctrine with their blood; where Peter had a passion like that of the Lord, where Paul was crowned with the death of John [the Baptist, by being beheaded]"

- Acts Of Peter has Peter in Rome."

And finally, Constantine clearly believed that St.Peter's grave was in the spot under the altar of St.Peter's, since he levelled half the vatican hill and built over a pagan cemetery to do it. Of course, that was 300 years later but it seems on most mainstream views there was a christian community in Rome from very early on, one might imagine, if Peter really had died there, that they would have preserved the knowledge of his resting place if it were known.

jules?

Um let me get this straight; a vaguely historical character cum literary device who is credited to be the foundations of the Christian church just happens to go to the centre of the empire, be burnt/savaged by animals at the command of Nero at the circus that later becomes a cemetery and is then land donated to the Roman Church who really do build the church on the rock of Peter [as well as lots and lots of pagans] who dig down into the foundations only to find a tomb that has no real name on it to find some womens, male and animal bones.

Amazing; god works in really mad ways, as opposed to the merchants of Venice who simply stole Mark's bones from Alexandria.

Is it just me or does it sound unbelievable bollocks; it amazes me that any one with any intelligence could look you in the face and swear it is true. I listerned to a 'historian' talking about popes and started the first episode with Peter. Complete nonsense but this expert is not laughed out of his profession.

2-J

Doesn't the story rather go that he was crucified? And that his body was buried in a 1st century cemetery (a cemetery with first century graves does lie under St.Peter's, no matter what we might think of the rest of the tale). As for the land being donated to the Roman Church, more likely it was just seized wholesale by Constantine, no problem or unlikely coincidence there then.

Is it so unbelievable that he would travel to Rome? If Christianity caught on in isolated pockets at all, might not we expect some small Christian community in Rome early on?

WWJD4aKlondikeBar

I read somewhere that Nero supposedly crucified Peter upside-down.

I'll see if I can find that reference...