Orthodox say St. Paul established the Church of Rome

[Ite_ad_Ioseph]

Okay, apologists, apologize away:
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Church_of_Rome
from Orthodox wiki:
The Church of Rome was part of the ancient Pentarchy and the only apostolic see founded in the West. Until roughly 1054, the usual center-point for the Great Schism, the Church of Rome was in full communion with the rest of the Orthodox Church. The Church in Rome was founded by St. Paul. This is clear to any reader of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans. St. Linus (+ c. 78), is the first bishop (pope) and a martyr. A disciple of the Apostle Paul, he was consecrated by him. One of the Seventy Apostles, he is mentioned in 2 Timothy 4, 21. He was the bishop for about twelve years and may have been martyred.

 

[YADA]

Funny how St. Paul could write his letter to the Church at Rome [Romans] already established and when he had not yet arrived … Roman Christians were made up of both Jews and Gentiles. Romans was written in about 57 AD … The Emporer Cluadius expelled both Jews and Christians [Chrestus] in aout 49 AD …

Add to that that Paul writes to these Christians in Rome to introduce himself … “Hi, I’m Paul and I founded this community … pleased to meet you”

 

[JohnVIII]

Here’s what the Apostolic Constitutions have to say on this matter:

Taken from ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.ix.viii.iv.html

Of the church of Rome, Linus the son of Claudia was the first, ordained by Paul, and Clemens, after Linus’ death, the second, ordained by me Peter.

 

[DavWan]

Interesting. This Pentarchy consisted of:

1. *]Rome (See of Peter)
   *]Antioch (founded by Peter, but never considered the See of Peter)
   *]Alexandria (founded by Mark, disciple of Peter)
   *]Constantinople (established as a See in AD 381)
   *]Jerusalem (established as a see in AD 451)
   
   It is interesting that this ortho wiki denies the role of Peter at all, when so many Patristics identify Rome as the See of Peter. Linus, who they call the First Pope, was identified as the successor of Peter.
   
   The omission of the mention of Peter seems based in a wish to deny the primacy which existed

 

[Hesychios]

There is no point in taking an article from Wiki and using it as a club. Anyone can write anything and get it in there! The person who contributed that part might not even be Orthodox.

I, as an Orthodox Christian do not assert that St. Paul founded the church at Rome.

It is certain that there were already Christians in Rome before St Peter or St Paul arrived. The fact is no one knows who the first Christian was in Rome, and we don’t know how long that person stayed or if that person made any converts.

The one thing that is most likely is that it was very early and thus probably a Jewish Christian, probably not a Gentile Christian. Perhaps a family, which then probably went to synagog for worship. No one knows when the first ordained elder arrived, or even the first ‘bishop’ (who may have been Linus). No one knows who organized the first house church in Rome, or even Antioch. One can assume that it was an Apostle but there is no evidence, and the Faith was spreading beyond the travels of Apostles in every direction.

St. Paul himself met Priscilla and Aquila in Corinth, and they had already been living in Rome as Jewish Christians and expelled. This was while St Peter was working in Antioch.

I think that St Peter was probably the first Apostle to physically arrive in the city, but that is not certain. We know he eventually spent some years there and ended his ministry there under the same persecution that St Paul died in.

St Paul seems to have spent his entire time in Rome awaiting trial. It might have been less than three years and my guess is he should not have been able to make the rounds of the house churches.

 

[Ite_ad_Ioseph]

Interesting thought, especially yours, Michael, (I would try to remember how to spell your username but, nah). You seem a thousand times nicer and charitable than the Orthodox seem at the Ortho-wiki.