elcome to a thorough study guide through this article and the links below on the current state of scholarship and beliefs about the founding of the Christian Church some of which refutes some of the long held beliefs about who and where the Church was actually first founded.  We will include an in-depth study of the two Apostles, Peter and James the Lesser (of Jerusalem) (Brother of Jesus) and Saint Paul and their role in the founding of the Church.  It includes on-line links to complete historical texts, reading list and the diverse views on the subject. This will be a permanent part of our Christian Enrichment section under the Twelve Apostles.

Tradition has it that Peter and Paul founded the Christian Church and Peter was its first Bishop. The term Pope was first used in 4th or 5th century.  With recent changes in the leadership of the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholic Church, the latter of which is continuing an overly conservative theology under Benedict XVI, it seem this is a time to examine the traditions concerning the founding of the Christian Church and to look at other possibilities recently raised by scholars and theologians.  In the past decade, there have been extensive scholarly efforts to re-examine the roots of the Judeo/Christian history in an effort to paint a more accurate history about the faith of Abraham.  This is all part of the new minimalism in both archaeology and exegetical studies that insist we must find evidence outside of Holy Scriptures.  This minimalism has been applied to both the new and the old Testaments.  It is as yet reached into the Islamic world, because of international tensions which exists with the relations of the three faiths.  However, it is Christianity that is getting the most scrutiny.   It can be said, with seeming prejudice that no religion in history has had more influence on history, good and bad, than Christianity.  These minimalists are trying to find hard evidence of Jesus' existence outside of the Bible. 

The Gods of the ancient world with all their layered theology and intimate identification with the natural world are gone. Many of the older extant religions such as the Hinduism with their myriad of Gods, founded in pre-history, and Buddhism, founded 500 years before Christ are still limited to the Indo-Asian world. The zealot Christian missionaries who came to their countries have lessened much of these religions’ outward impact on world history. Secondarily, their inward mystical beliefs and theology do not lead their adherents to an outward view of the world. Adding to this, the suppression of religion by China, the most populace Indo-Asian nation has also stifled their outward growth. 

There is no nation one cannot find a Christian presence, albeit small in some cases.  Our Jewish brothers and sisters, who are the root of both Christians and Moslems, have been lessened by the terrible persecution they have suffered plus the reluctant nature of Judaism to evangelize because, unlike Christians, Jews believe you are born into the faith.  The current fanatical upheavals in Islam demonstrate a religion struggling out of its medieval infancy and isolation in its attempt to influence the world stage.

For Christianity to move forward it is important to examine our roots.  Fortunately, the Anglican Church has developed a core practice of a constant re-examination and questioning. This quality does not always find itself present in other Christian sects. This is one of the reasons that so much superior religious scholarship has emanated from the Anglican Church.   

Now to the question at hand…Who founded the Christian Church?  The answer might seem obvious when quoting the Gospel of Matthew, “Simon Peter answered, ‘You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.’ And Jesus answered him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

Christ designated Peter to found a church!?  The question that many current scholars ask is “Did he?” If you look at Scripture hence there are no actions by Peter to indicate he founded a church. He, like all the other Apostles, spread Christ’s teachings. Peter is a far from the perfect Apostle denying Christ three times before his crucifixion.  So why did Christ pick such an imperfect man considering that the alternative, his brother James, was a man of impeccable moral and spiritual character who demanded no less of others.  It is reasonable to speculate that Jesus wanted a Church to be born out of Peter's frailties so that the Church could best address and subsequently address the similar frailties, both moral and ethically, of all humankind.   For information on Saint Peter, see our article in this section, Peter, the Christian Enigma. 

What about Paul? (left) He has some indirect scriptural help in this matter of Church founding, which he recounts in his letter to the Galatians. “But when God, who had set me apart before I was born and called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles.”  However in that same letter, Paul acknowledges that Church already existed when he said, “I did not confer with any human being, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were already apostles before me, but I went away at once into Arabia, and afterwards I returned to Damascus.

Then after three years, I did go up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas (Peter) and stayed with him fifteen days; but I did not see any other apostle except James the Lord’s brother. In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie! Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, and I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea that are in Christ; they only heard it said, ‘The one who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith he once tried to destroy.’ And they glorified God because of me.”

Paul appears in the Book of Acts and other portions of Scripture like most of the Apostles as a middleman and mediator for Peter and James when it comes to the founding the Church.  This is reflected in the Book of Acts which details the rivalry between Peter and James, as well as a rivalry between Paul and Peter.  For the past two millennia, however, Christianity has given Paul the principal role of creating the core of Christian theology through his 13 letters. Without Paul, we have no belief system.  Peter and James contribute little to Christian beliefs in their three canonical Christian text. Peter I and II and the Letter of James.

Where James (left by El Greco) takes pre-eminence is in the first part of the Book of Acts, it is obvious that some sort of Church had already been established by James.  Modern theologians calls this the Jewish Christian Church.    Robert Eisenman, in his epical book "James Brother of Jesus" firmly establishes the case that this wing of the Church was operating possibly as early as 45c.e.  This is before Peter and Paul’s departure to Rome and their subsequent martyrdom in 63c.e.  Further proof of the early Jerusalem church can found in ACTS 15 in form of a council set up in Jerusalem headed by James, Brother of Jesus.  

“The whole assembly kept silence, and listened to Barnabas and Paul as they told of all the signs and wonders that God had done through them among the Gentiles. After they finished speaking, James replied, “My brothers, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first looked favorably on the Gentiles, to take from among them a people for his name. This agrees with the words of the prophets, as it is written,…Therefore I have reached the decision that we should not trouble those Gentiles who are turning to God, but we should write to them to abstain only from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from whatever has been strangled and from blood.”

Here James is giving orders to the assembled disciples, including Peter and Paul, much like the leader of a corporation or government might do. He is sending them out to tell the "Good News" of Christ.  So where does that leave Peter and Paul and the founding of the Church?   It leads them right to Rome, where despite their persecution and death in the early 60’s, they founded the Roman branch of the Church.  This was a church that founded for the gentiles as opposed to the Jews of Jerusalem.  Paul's letters reveal that.

Some recent theological and as well as exegetical arguments for James and against Peter as the founder of the church come from some Protestants religious scholars who are determined to lessen the long preeminence of the Roman Church and its view of Apostolic Succession.  Arguments also come from some Roman scholars who see these as attacks on their core belief in Apostolic Succession of its Bishops, even over Lutherans, Anglican and Orthodox bishops and other Christian Churches that observe that tradition.

Romans argue, for example, that James was not a Bishop. However, there is also no way to draw from canonical scripture that the Peter was called Bishop either. Although, the term and authority of the Bishop took firm hold in the Church right after Christ’s departure from this world, (I Timothy), it can be argued that perhaps James, Peter and Paul were given this title posthumously since all three had died by the early 60’s to insure a Church structure that allowed for succession. Any arguments are suspect, including this author’s, because they are based too much on speculation and extrapolation of missing early non-Biblical writings by those who were there, such as St. Clement.

  We Anglicans can view Apostolic Succession a little more loosely by seeing it as succession of our Bishops from all the Apostles not just Peter. However, even we acknowledge the initial supremacy of the Roman Church over others that formed out of the Jerusalem Council headed by James. Most of those non-Roman churches almost immediately went on their own, such as the Coptics to Egypt, the Chaldeans to Iraq, and the Armenians and Indian Christians, both claiming James as their founder, thus lessening their influence on a world whose center was at Rome when it comes to defining early Christianity.   

None of this takes away from the efforts of Peter and Paul and the establishment of the western church.  Peter, Paul and James’ Council at Jerusalem saw it as essential to mount a major effort to establish a church in Rome. There are indications of the importance of Rome and Christianity in Josephus, the first century Roman Jewish historian and quotes from the now lost writings of Pope Clement I (92-101, 4th Pope) by Eusebius and other early church historians. Jerusalem was a backwater that had been conquered and re-conquered so many times that by the time the Roman were ruling it had lost almost all of its national identity--a state not helped by the long-ruling Herodian kings, most of who were corrupt and evil to the bone and by the time of Christ mere Roman puppets. The last gasp toward ancient Jewish nationalism came in revolt of 70c.e. and the destruction of the second temple by Rome.

This leads to an arguable conclusion that James, Brother of Jesus, directed the Church from Jerusalem and that Peter and Paul were following his orders. In an earlier time, this might be viewed as heretical.  Fortunately, for all of us, modern Christians can investigate, question, and discern our Christian history and scripture.  Those who do not only close the door on the most powerful man ever born, Jesus Christ, and limit the reach of the Gospels to all who wish to share his table.