Is Mark Peter's Son?

[Gentle Knight]

In the first letter of Peter, chapter 5, it says at the end:

12 With the help of Silas, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly, encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand fast in it.

13 She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark. 14 Greet one another with a kiss of love. (NIV)

It is also generally accepted that the Gospel of Mark was Peter's account written down by Mark. IMHO what would be more natural than Peter's son helping his Dad out (since we know that at that time Peter's Koynay Greek was not very good), by writing down his account.

I see other possible references to this, but I do note that in most versions (and in the Greek manuscript), it states, for instance, the Silas is a 'faithful brother' which would indicate probably not a blood relation. At the same time Peter does not say 'Mark my son in the faith' or anything similar. As such it seems a closer, probably blood relation.

I solicit the opinions and thoughts of others please.

Blessings

 

[Paul Yohannan]

The ancient tradition is that St. Mark was St. Peter's disciple (and St. Luke, St. Paul's), and that St. Mark wrote his Gospel based on what St. Peter told him, and was sent by St. Peter to establish the Church of Alexandria. However, it is also the tradition that the Cenacle, the Upper Room, was in St. Mark's house. There are two sites for this, one of which is contested with the Jews and Muslims and consists of a Gothic church built by the Crusaders, over what I strongly believe is actually the Tomb of King David, and the other is a monastery belonging to my church continually since the Islamic conquest of Jerusalem.

Either way, givdn St. Peter's humble origins as a Gallilean fisherman, I find it unlikely that his son could afford a house in Jerusalem, and have it within just three years of his father meeting our Lord. Also, the tradition which you cite involves Mark being literate (his literacy is suggested by both Pauline and Petrine epistles, that he and Luke were among the scribes who composed the Koine Greek letters for the elders who were not literate or could only write, and spoke mainly, in Judean or Gallilean Aramaic with some liturgical Hebrew and pidgin Greek patois thrown in), which further casts doubt on his son.

There is however no specific tradition I am aware of that says St. Mark was absolutely not the biological son of St. Peter, but it seems to me very unlikely. One has to remember that Sts. Andrew, Peter, James and John were dirt-poor fishermen, St. John was probably a boy of around 13, and given the life expectancy none of them were likely older than our Lord. It is doubtful they could read, write, or lived in anything other than very modest posessions, and at most owned some small fishing boats and nets.