Source: https://catholicismcoffee.org
Arguably the two greatest apostles of Christ, Paul and Peter stand in front of the crowd as the two major witnesses to the faith. Peter was the rock on which Christ formed His Church, and became the first Pope as the specialized Shepard of Christ’s Flock on Earth. Paul wrote the majority of the New Testament, with 13 letters ascribed to his name (most scholars agree that 7 are objectively his, yet the other 6 are of contested authorship).
However, when both of them met, their meeting was not one of jolly unification, but of stern confrontation. Furthermore, there is evidence to the claim that they met again, yet no evidence that their relationship healed. Today’s article will deal with all of the sources we have that combine the two figures.
Paul — Confronting the Leader
Saul of Tarsus, the Pharisee, the persecutor of Christians turned Christian, the Apostle to the Gentiles, writes about Peter in detail only once; The Incident at Antioch.
For some context; in the beginning of Church history, the Apostolic Age, one of the earliest conflicts was that of the prospect of gentiles becoming Christian. As Christianity began as a sect of Judaism (and Jesus Himself was a Jew), many early Christians believed that in order to be a good Christian, you need to be a good Jew first. This entails of the food laws, Jewish practices and customs, and most notoriously, circumcision. Abraham was circumcised in Genesis 17:11 (You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you [NIV].) and since then, the act of circumcision was the act of the covenant between the Chosen People and God. Thus, when Gentiles converted to Christ, they didn’t want to circumcise, but many of the Jewish Christians demanded it of them, causing a rift.
The Jerusalem Council was held in order to settle this, concluding that circumcision and being a good Jew was not necessary to become Christian. (Acts 15 describes the event).
Now that the context is set, we can venture into the Incident at Antioch.The event is described in the letter to the Galatians, where Paul writes:And when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he clearly was wrong. For, until some people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to draw back and separated himself, because he was afraid of the circumcised. And the rest of the Jews [also] acted hypocritically along with him, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not on the right road in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of all, “If you, though a Jew, are living like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?” — Paul’s Letter to the Galatians 2:11–14
In summary, when Paul met with Cephas (Peter), he realized that Peter was giving in to the pressure of the Jewish Christians around him. This fits in quite well with his character, such as when Peter gave into pressure by the crowd after Jesus’s arrest and rejected Christ three times (Mark 14:66–72). Peter, as is implied in the above writing, was on the side of those who believed Gentiles should be forced to circumcise and live like Jews (last sentence). However, Peter was hypocritical, and would eat with the Gentiles, yet would back away (out of fear and pressure) when the Jewish Christians came. As Peter, the leader, did this, so did the rest of the Jewish Christians and even Barnabas, which drove Paul mad. For Paul, you stay on one side, not shift back and forth and then influence everyone to be as hypocritical as you. As well, Paul was on the side of those who believed Gentiles did not have to circumcise themselves to be Christian. This is why Paul had to stand up to Peter, in front of everyone, and with much force. There is no recorded response from Peter, all we know is that this must have caused a rift between the two. There is a possibility Peter repented, yet we cannot know either way.
Paul and Peter did later meet at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15), but nothing is recorded about their meeting or conversation (if they had one).
One final (possible) piece of evidence for a continuing rift between Paul and Peter is that of Paul’s apparent absence of Peter in his list of beloved brothers at the end of his letter to the Romans. Romans chapter 16, the end of the letter, pronounces a massive list of those whom Paul expresses greetings to, yet Cephas/Peter is not on the list, although he spent some of his life there. There are certain possible reasons for this:
Peter was not in Rome at the moment
Paul did not know Peter was at Rome
Paul and Peter’s rift was not reconciled
Paul did not want to reveal Peter as the Leader of the Church in case the letter got in the hands of Roman Persecutors
Lastly, for possible proof of either a mended relationship or for an increased respect/authority for Peter, Paul distinguishes his name among the Lord’s brothers in the first letter to the Corinthians, writing:
Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? — 1 Corinthians 9:5 (NIV)
In conclusion, we know there was a rift, but we do not know, from Paul’s written sources, whether or not the rift was mended or continued.
Peter (or pseudonym) and his respect for Paul
Peter, the Apostle to the Jews, only mentions Paul once (for whether or not 2 Peter was actually written by Peter, which most scholars disagree with. Even if 2 Peter was not written by Peter himself, the author most likely had connections with him or shared his basic viewpoints.) in his second letter, saying:
Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. — 2 Peter 3:15–16 This seems to imply that their relationship has mended by the time Peter was writing this letter; if not, at least the respect Peter had for Paul increased, as he even refers to Paul’s letters as “scriptures”. If Peter was not the one that wrote this letter, it nonetheless shows that there was common knowledge that Paul and Peter were not rivals or enemies, but instead brothers in Christ.
Statue of St. Paul in St. Peter’s Square, Rome
The 2 in Rome — Paul
The Acts of the Apostles does not record the end of Paul or Peter’s life, yet it does record that Paul was on house arrest in Rome, saying:
For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him. He proclaimed the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ — with all boldness and without hindrance! — Acts 28:30–31 (NIV)
Paul being under house arrest for two years means that he was awaiting his judgment, as prisons in Rome were not necessarily to hold someone as punishment, but to hold someone until they could be brought to trial and condemned. Paul thus was probably condemned to death after those two years.
This most likely took place in the early 60’s A.D., and Acts was written most likely from 80–85 A.D., testifying to the reliability of the claims (The Acts of the Apostles: Anchor Yale Bible Commentary by Joseph A. Fitzmyer pgs. 51–66).
The 2 in Rome — Peter
It is possible that Peter did go to Rome at least once in his life, as briefly alluded to above. However, let us list some more evidence for the possibility:
The First Letter of Peter (which has many more scholars who hold of Petrine authorship than 2 Peter) declares this to the readers:
She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark. — 1 Peter 5:13 (NIV)
This verse has been taken by many to be code (necessary under times of persecution) to signify Rome. Rome was the capital of the Roman Empire, thus the allusion to Babylon is perfect. As well, this is not the only place in Christian literature where Rome is named Babylon, as Revelation takes the name and runs with it, using the symbol of “Babylon the Whore” to allude to Rome and the Empire (Rev. 17).
The Church Fathers also document some tradition of Peter being in Rome, such as when Ignatius wrote this to the Roman Church:
I do not, as Peter and Paul, issue commandments unto you. They were apostles; I am but a condemned man: they were free, while I am, even until now, a servant. — Ignatius’s Letter to the Romans ch. 4
Written in the first century, this could refer to Paul and Peter both being present in Rome, yet it is sadly too vague to be certain.
Irenaeus, during the second century, wrote that Paul and Peter were the founders of the Church in Rome (no.2), yet this seems to be untrue as there was already a “church” present when Paul was under House Arrest (furthermore, Paul was writing TO the Romans before his house arrest). Maybe Irenaeus is referring to a larger, more formal Church. Once again, the source is too vague or otherwise a false statement.
Most likely in the late second century (190 A.D.), Clement of Alexandria writes:
And at last, [Peter] having come to Rome, he was crucified head-downwards; for he had requested that he might suffer in this way.
— Church History III chapter 1 verse 2
As Peter had preached the Word publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel by the Spirit… — Church History VI chapter 14 verse 6
These verses, although not vague at all, cannot be objectively seen as historically reliable for their late date. It is very possible, and could be from tradition that has very early roots, yet with the sources we have presently, it is difficult to determine it’s reliability.
Lastly of the Church Fathers, Lactantius, writing in possibly 318, writes this about the dating of Peter’s coming to Rome:
And while Nero reigned, the Apostle Peter came to Rome, and, through the power of God committed unto him, wrought certain miracles, and, by turning many to the true religion, built up a faithful and steadfast temple unto the Lord.
— Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died ch. 2
Once again, because of the late dating, this is not something that we can objectively trust as true. It is very possible, yet on this source alone, no historical conclusions can be positively made for Peter’s presence in Rome.
All in all, the mass number of early traditions, compiled with Peter’s first letter, give us reason to say that the possibility of Peter being in Rome is very high (70–80% in my calculations). We cannot take these individual sources on their own, but combined, with all of their suggestions and implications. I believe that if we examine the whole scope of events, we can see that (objectively) Peter most likely was in Rome at least once in his life, and that it is very probable that he was also martyred there.
Many scholars believe this was also during the 60’s, during the reign of Nero and his persecution against the Christians. This lines up perfectly with Paul.
Martyrdom of the 2
There is early tradition that Paul was martyred in Rome, and some later tradition and stories describe the execution method being decapitation.
There is also early tradition that Peter was martyred in Rome by crucifixion, and apocryphal tradition states it was upside down.
Conclusion: Reconciled or Rivals?
In conclusion, Paul and Peter most likely did meet up again, yet there is no evidence that their their relationship healed, nor is there evidence to the contrary. It is all up to the subjective mind to decide whether or not they became unified. I personally believe, maybe because it is the most pleasing, that they did heal their friendship. It is your choice, as the reader, to come up with the conclusion that you decide upon with all the sources listed.
It is important to heal our relationships with those who we argue with, or those that we go out to fix straight. As Christ said:
“If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. — Matthew 18:15 (NIV)
As well, and most importantly in terms of repairing previous clashes:
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?”
Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.
— Matthew 18:21–22 (NIV)
The feast day of Peter and Paul is on June 29th, in honor of their martyrdom in Rome, and also in honor of the tradition surrounding their martyrdom, that they died on the same day. It is a solemnity, which is a feast day of the highest rank. Nothing less for two of the greatest Apostles who ever lived.
