have known St. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians (written during St. Paul’s first
Roman captivity which ended in 62 AD) and because of the absence of any
reference to an official Roman persecution of Christians, which began in
August 64 AD. St. Peter outlines the same duties for slaves, wives and
husbands as in Ephesians 5:22-33 and 6:5-8. To have such precise
knowledge of this letter so soon after its composition, as well as being
certain of its authenticity, St. Peter must have been in close proximity to St.
Paul––that is, in Rome with him, not in far-away Babylon.
Furthermore, in the final farewell of 1 Peter, St. Peter mentions Silvanus
and St. Mark. Silvanus, the bearer of 1 Peter, was a constant companion of
St. Paul (Acts 15:22; 32:40; 2 Cor. 1:19; 1 Thes. 1:1; 2 Thes. 1:1) while St.
Mark was with St. Paul in Rome during his first captivity (Col. 4:10). Why
would Silvanus be in Babylon with St. Peter if he normally traveled with
St. Paul; and how could St. Mark so easily team up with St. Peter and be in
Babylon so soon after being mentioned in Colossians 4:10 with St. Paul in
Rome? The more likely answer is that they were with St. Paul and St. Peter
who were both in Rome at the same time.
So much is made also of the fact that St. Paul never refers to St. Peter being
in Rome in Romans or in any of his Captivity Epistles. Boettner exclaims,
“How strange for a missionary to write to a church and not mention the
pastor! That would be an inexcusable affront” (p. 121). The answer is quite
simple. Christians were well known and despised even before the first
official persecution of Nero. The Emperor Claudius expelled all Christians
and Jews from Rome in 50 AD because of their disputes over a man named
“Chrestus,” according to the ancient historian Suetonius.¹ St. Peter was
known as the leader of this seditious sect. Therefore, it was necessary to
always conceal the identity and whereabouts of St. Peter in order to protect
both him and the Christians he visited. Roman officials routinely read mail
for security reasons, hence the prudence on the part of early Christians,
concealing the name of St. Peter and even Rome in any important
correspondence.
Disproving Boettner’s claim that “Not one of the early church fathers gives
any support to the belief that Peter was a bishop in Rome until Jerome in
1
Lives of the Caesars, Claud. 25, 4. By “Chrestus,” Suetonius clearly intended
“Christus,” which is Latin for Christ.
 |
 |
 |