The only evidence in the New Testament for the existence of a church in Rome is Paul's letter to the Romans. Its founding is not reported anywhere; we know nothing of who founded it , when and how. Any proposal regarding these questions remain, at best, an educated guess. Traditions named Peter as the founder and first bishop of the church in Rome. But Paul has also been credited by other traditions as co-founder with Peter of the church. It is unlikely that Peter—despite all the affirmations of the Roman Catholic Church—could have founded the church there; he came too late to Rome for that to be possible. Since Paul's letter to the church attests that he had not founded the church, the traditions cannot, therefore, be taken seriously.
The Roman historian, Suetonius,who was also Emperor Hadrian's secretary, reported that Emperor Claudius, who reigned 41-54 AD, had expelled the Jews from Rome as a result of unrest among them "on occasion of Chrestus."1 Since the letters 'e' and 'i' in Latin and Greek were at that time interchangeable, it has been suggested that this could possibly be understood as "on occasion of Christus." If this is so, then the unrest among the Jews in Rome, and their subsequent expulsion, was probably the result of some Jews in Rome beginning to discuss or to accept Jesus as the Messiah. This expulsion has been dated to 50 AD.2 If this is the case, then the church in Rome would have been established within twenty years of Jesus's death and resurrection. Most scholars believe its planting should be placed much earlier, possibly by those Jews who were in Jerusalem when the first outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost brought many from all across the Roman Empire to faith in the Lord Jesus (Acts 2).
If we know nothing of the church's founding, we are also equally clueless of its composition at the time Romans was written. Was it a church of Jewish converts to Christ or was it composed of Jewish and Gentile believers? Nothing in Romans provides a clear answer. Arguments that Paul's extensive reference to the Old Testament and such statements as "if you call yourself a Jew" (2:17) are not entirely persuasive. The assumption that is easily made that the expansive exposition about the future of Israel (9-11) would only be of interest to Jews is equally unconvincing, since—understood within its proper context—it has to do with God's faithfulness to his promises, which would certainly be eminently relevant to Gentile Christians. In fact, it may be argued that this address was crafted for a predominantly Gentile audience since Paul makes a personal and direct address to Gentile believers as he begins to draw this discussion to a conclusion:
I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them. For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? If the part of the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the root is holy, so are the branches. If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in." Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree! I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins." As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable. Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God's mercy to you. For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all. Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! "Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counsellor?" "Who has ever given to God, that God should repay him?" For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory for ever! Amen. (Rom 11:13-36).
While we cannot be certain about the matter, it seems highly likely that the church in Rome had both Jewish as well as Gentile believers. R. E. Brown, affirmed by Joseph Fitzmyer, has a rather strong case for his proposal that, while the church in Rome was both Jewish and Gentile in composition, its Christianity had "come from Jerusalem, and indeed represented the Jewish/Gentile Christianity associated with such Jerusalem figures as Peter and James" and that most of them were Christians "who kept up some Jewish observances and remained faithful to part of the heritage of the Jewish Law cult, without insisting on circumcision."3 It would be an error, however, to picture them as much like the Judaizers we meet in Galatians who taught, what Paul calls "a different gospel, which is no gospel at all (Gal 1:6-7). They were, rather, Christians who thought "in Jewish categories."4 These proposals make much sense of what we read in the letter.
What can more assuredly be argued, however, is that the church in Rome was not a single congregation. Though Paul had never visited the church before, he knew (through his 'networking,' perhaps) many people in the church; his greetings in Chap 16, assuming it is addressed to the church in Rome (on this see the introduction to that chapter), is evidence of this. There Paul asks, however, for greetings to be sent to "the church (ekklesia) that meets at their (Priscilla & Aquila's) house" (v5), "Greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas and the brothers with them," (v14), "Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas and all the saints with them" (v15). It seems certain then that in these greetings we see both Jews and Gentiles meeting in different homes in Rome.
Low Chai Hok
©Alberith, 2021