revolution. In 1933, against all odds, it saved the great oil field — and George Strake’s immense fortune. As the world slowly tumbled toward war with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia, the world price of oil increased from prices as low as $0.10 per barrel to $1.20 and more per barrel. This meant Strake’s field became even more valuable, securing his position as one of the richest men in the world.
George Strake’s Secret
George enjoyed a happy, fulfilling life beyond his successful career. He and Susan had three children, and thanks to Susan’s friendly nature, they enjoyed an active and enriching social life. She was much loved in Houston for her generous heart. The Strakes also entertained on a substantial scale, hobnobbing with celebrities such as Frank Sinatra, Dorothy Lamour, Jane Russell, Robert Mitchum, and the like. George — extraordinarily thrifty himself — true to his promise, never questioned Susan’s expenditures as a member of Houston society, friend to movie stars, and serious shopper in venues ranging from Fifth Avenue to the Via Veneto. A relative of Susan’s who deeply loved her remarked facetiously that when she died, department stores in Houston flew their flags at half-mast.
As would be expected from a veteran of World War I, a wildcatter in lawless Mexico, and a man who had worked his way from poverty to riches at least three times, George could appear stern and sometimes gruff. But unlike most other wildcatters, George had a very strange secret. He held the curious belief that he was simply a stakeholder of the vast Conroe Field, and that it was a gift from God, not the result of his own cleverness or worth. He said that far from being a crazy Lone Wolf Wildcatter, he was actually a team of two. His job was to return the field’s vast wealth to the causes God approved. As a result of this conviction, he was strongly devoted to causes such as St. Joseph’s Hospital, the Boy Scouts, high schools and universities, but most of all to the Catholic Church. On his desk, he kept the saying of another legendary oilman and philanthropist from Pittsburgh, Michael Benedum: “God doesn’t care how much money you have when you die. God does care what you did with the money you had when you were alive.”
Strake deeply feared leaving substantial funds to his children because of the corrosive effect of money. In fact, he intended to give everything away while he was still alive, even the things he loved most. In all his contributions, he demanded total anonymity. He often said that he intended to give his last dollar away anonymously with his last breath.
When Father Carroll arrived from Rome with Pope Pius XII’s mysterious request for funding, he was relying on Strake’s uncanny ability to see the immense possibility where others could not. Just as Strake had been able to see an unlikely underground sea of oil where no one else saw anything of value, now he saw the possibility of a monumental archeological discovery under the Vatican. Like the pope, Strake had been consumed from childhood with the early Christian Church. He was also deeply pious, reading the Bible almost every day. His faith left him in little doubt that Peter would be found. In an age when the wealthy named grand projects for themselves like Rockefeller Center or Stanford University or Carnegie Hall, Strake was insistent that nothing be named for him at all. He wanted his involvement in the Apostle Project to be kept completely secret. The pope had found the perfect participant. Strake, for his part, had found his wildest wildcat.
Chapter Three
Peter
“Jesus said to them, ‘Come after me, and I will make you fishers of men.’ Then they abandoned their nets and followed him.” — Mark 1:17–18
Who was the Apostle Peter? What were his defining characteristics? What was there that would be helpful either in identifying his mortal remains (if located) or the things associated with him? Had he really come to or remained in dangerous Rome in the age of the bloodthirsty Emperor Nero?
He was by most accounts a simple, middle class, middle-aged Jewish fisherman named Simon, of no particular note, when he met Christ near the sea of Galilee. He had been born in the village of Bethsaida in Galilee (now in Syria) around the turn of the first millennium A.D. From the Gospel account, we know his father’s name was John, and he had a brother named Andrew who also became an apostle of Jesus. He was married, and Christ cured his mother-in-law of a sickness. His in-laws lived in the delightful coastal city of Capernaum. Some accounts say he had three children.
He owned his own boat on the Sea of Galilee. Peter was likely a robust and powerful man hardened by the sea and the need to throw out and pull in nets. He was all in all a typical first-century small entrepreneur without any particular import, who would have long since totally vanished from history and been forgotten but for his meeting with Christ circa A.D. 30.
Responding positively to a practical stranger’s invitation to become “a fisher of men,” he abandoned his home, his boat, his business, and probably his family to follow and become the leading disciple of a man whom the world would regard as an idealistic, totally impractical, quixotic dreamer. That man was called Jesus. To mark the fisherman’s new work, Jesus also gave him a new name, one which was uncommon in ancient times25 — Petros, or Peter — which means “rock.” This name is given to no one else in Scripture. Although his faith often deserted him, Peter was the first to claim Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah (see Matthew 16:13). In turn, Christ gave him “the keys to the kingdom.”
The road the fisherman followed from Jesus’ invitation on the shore of the Sea of Galilee would have many twists and turns. He would travel far from simple Galilee over the next three decades, and would come to be venerated as the first pope, one of the greatest Christian saints, and even recognized as a great leader for the Christians by some Muslims.26
Was he the sort of courageous person who would actually come to and stay in Rome while he knew himself to be the target of the wrath of Nero? Or would he have fled the emperor’s notorious cruelty? The answer is both. The Peter who three times denied even knowing Christ in his greatest hour of need, was the same person who sought to defend Christ against a crowd of arresting soldiers. Later, the same man who once tried and failed to walk on water would appear twice before the Sanhedrin — the same tribunal that had seized Christ — excoriating them for their cowardly and evil treatment of Jesus. Peter was clearly capable both of defying the emperor to his face on his home ground and fleeing. He was much the type of man who would first flee and then, mortified by his cowardice, return to face death.
Yet tradition holds that he stayed in Rome (or returned) and was crucified upside down around the year 65. If this ancient story proved true, what would an archeological excavation find? Most likely the relics would be those of a man in his sixties with a robust physique, bearing marks of crucifixion. The Jewish turncoat general Josephus,27 who joined the Romans to destroy his own people, wrote of how the Roman soldiers at play would crucify Jewish captives in various different positions for their amusement. Tacitus described how Nero in particular crucified Christians upside-down. Peter’s relics — if they somehow survived two thousand years — would likely show marks of violent crucifixion.
Finally, if the old legends that Christians found and preserved the remains of the first pope were actually true, surely they would have left some symbols of respect to mark the site — perhaps a cloth wrapping or hidden inscriptions (hidden, since they themselves would continue to be persecuted for 250 years after Nero). What clues might archeologists search for? Because the name “Peter” was largely unknown before Christ gave it to Simon, any discovered reference to “Petros” from the first century almost surely referred to the pope. Drawings of key symbols, particularly with a “P” or “Pe” for Petros, would be other clear ways of representing Peter.
Many secularists denied that Peter ever went to Rome. In addition, Martin Luther claimed that nobody knew where in Rome
