Peter And James

[at0m1c]

I need some help in answering this question from an unbeliever.

if Peter was the supposed Rock, how come James was the head of the Jerusalem Church and not him? I think the "diocese" of Rome came after the "dioceses" of Jerusalem, Alexandra and Antioch?

[BLAZEr]

I think the best way to respond to this is to point out that this is precisely why the seat of the Church isn't Jerusalem, but rather Rome. The Rock was a person, not a place. So where Peter went, there went the foundation of the Church.

The Church immediately tried to fulfill the mandate to "go out to the ends of the earth baptizing in the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit." The Church never saw Jerusalem as its home, but it did see Peter as its leader, which is why the Church "grew up" around Rome.