If Peter wasn't the first pope, who was?

Unofficial Reverand Alex

Pray in silence...God speaks softly
Supporter
Dec 22, 2017
2,355
2,915
The Mystical Lands of Rural Indiana
Visit site
✟526,763.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
If the Papacy really is an innovation of the Roman Catholic Church, when did it begin? Could it have been during the oft-hated Medieval Catholic Church, when corrupt bishops decided to name a pope? No, it couldn't have been, if the Great Schism of 1054 (and tensions beginning much earlier) were primarily over the role of the Pope in the Church.

So the Catholic Church upholds that Peter was the first pope, and thus receives a lot of vicious attacks from Protestants who claim that "claiming" Peter as the first pope is a terrible thing for Catholics to do. But if he wasn't the first pope, who was? And how can Protestant Christians deny Peter as the first Pope, when Martin Luther himself described the Roman Catholic Church as "St. Peter's Church" in his 95 theses?

Included below is a link to many Church fathers discussing the issue of St. Peter as the first Pope, and I thought one quote was particularly noteworthy:


https://www.churchfathers.org/origins-of-peter-as-pope/
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).
 

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
11,444
3,769
Eretz
✟317,023.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
If the Papacy really is an innovation of the Roman Catholic Church, when did it begin? Could it have been during the oft-hated Medieval Catholic Church, when corrupt bishops decided to name a pope? No, it couldn't have been, if the Great Schism of 1054 (and tensions beginning much earlier) were primarily over the role of the Pope in the Church.

So the Catholic Church upholds that Peter was the first pope, and thus receives a lot of vicious attacks from Protestants who claim that "claiming" Peter as the first pope is a terrible thing for Catholics to do. But if he wasn't the first pope, who was? And how can Protestant Christians deny Peter as the first Pope, when Martin Luther himself described the Roman Catholic Church as "St. Peter's Church" in his 95 theses?

Included below is a link to many Church fathers discussing the issue of St. Peter as the first Pope, and I thought one quote was particularly noteworthy:


https://www.churchfathers.org/origins-of-peter-as-pope/
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).

The "pope" was nothing more than the Bishop of the patriarchate of Rome. James presided in Jerusalem at the beginning.
 
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,424
11,977
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,232.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
“The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).
St Cyprian is writing as one who himself sits in the chair of Peter. This quote is badly misinterpreted if it is used as support for the papacy.
 
Upvote 0

John Bowen

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 16, 2018
417
233
53
dueba
✟48,940.00
Country
Fiji
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Jesus Christ never authorized the office of Pope .He told us he would send the comforter the Holy Spirit which bloweth where it listeth . It can't be held in any man made office especially one that goes by succession . When he spoke of Peter he was speaking of everyone that sees the Christ when he is before them .Than Jesus also said," Get thee behind me Satan " cause Peter failed to understand the second challenge of Christ that the Christ will never ever conform to man made ideas to how the Christ should be or do.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The first Pope probably was Leo the Great (AD440-461). Prior to that time, there was a bishop of Rome, of course, and he was influential because of the fame of the city of Rome as the capitol of the Empire, by the wealth and size of that bishop's diocese, and by the reputation of Peter and Paul, both of whom are associated with the city. But as for claiming or receiving the authority that came to be associated with a Pope figure...no, probably not before his reign.
 
Upvote 0

dqhall

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 21, 2015
7,547
4,171
Florida
Visit site
✟766,603.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
St Cyprian is writing as one who himself sits in the chair of Peter. This quote is badly misinterpreted if it is used as support for the papacy.
Jesus spoke of those who sat in Moses' seat:

Matthew 25 (World English Bible - Public Domain)
1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples, 2 saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees sat on Moses' seat. 3 All things therefore whatever they tell you to observe, observe and do, but don't do their works; for they say, and don't do. 4 For they bind heavy burdens that are grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not lift a finger to help them. 5 But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad, enlarge the fringes of their garments, 6 and love the place of honor at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, 7 the salutations in the marketplaces, and to be called 'Rabbi, Rabbi' by men. 8 But don't you be called 'Rabbi,' for one is your teacher, the Christ, and all of you are brothers. 9 Call no man on the earth your father, for one is your Father, he who is in heaven. 10 Neither be called masters, for one is your master, the Christ. 11 But he who is greatest among you will be your servant. 12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

Archaeologists found a basalt stone seat in the ruins of a synagogue at Chorazin. Someone called it Moses' seat. They theorized the synagogue ruler sat in it.

https://ferrelljenkins.blog/2012/03/11/the-synagogue-at-chorazin/
 
Upvote 0

TuxAme

Quis ut Deus?
Supporter
Dec 16, 2017
2,422
3,264
Ohio
✟169,197.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
The "pope" was nothing more than the Bishop of the patriarchate of Rome. James presided in Jerusalem at the beginning.
Yes, but James wasn't given the charge to tend Christ's sheep. As St. Chrysostom said, this charge was given to Peter and his successors.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Lost4words
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,424
11,977
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,232.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Prior to that time, there was a bishop of Rome, of course, and he was influential because of the fame of the city of Rome as the capitol of the Empire, by the wealth and size of that bishop's diocese, and by the reputation of Peter and Paul, both of whom are associated with the city.
It wasn't just that. In the first centuries of the Church, becoming bishop of Rome was a guaranteed martyrdom, so only Christians of exemplary character took on the role. Thus they developed a reputation above and beyond any other bishopric.
 
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,424
11,977
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,232.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Yes, but James wasn't given the charge to tend Christ's sheep. As St. Chrysostom said, this charge was given to Peter and his successors.
And as St Cyprian of Carthage states, all bishops are Peter's successors.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Quid est Veritas?

In Memoriam to CS Lewis
Feb 27, 2016
7,319
9,272
South Africa
✟316,433.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The first person that was verifiably bishop of Rome and unequivocally was seen as an authority by other Christians, was Clement I in the late 1st century. I think a good argument can be made to call him the first pope. Temporal power only came later though, with the waning of the Western Roman Empire and the decline of Byzantine influence.

The early Church clearly recognised a special Petrine ascendancy though, giving special pride of place to tbe three 'Petrine' sees of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch. This was already stated at Nicaea, that they had jurisdiction outside their own areas and were perhaps touchstones of orthodoxy. Traditionally this was coupled to Peter, which is certainly from whence Clement's authority was later said to derive. What happened in those first murky years as NT 'Episcopos' evolved into the office of Bishops with delineated authority, is hard to reconstruct. Roman primacy is very early though, perhaps analogous to the secular practice of referring problematic legal cases or disputes to Rome. This seems certainly to be the argument why Constantinople was later elevated to a patriarchate, and both Antioch and Alexandria were regional capitals of important provinces to whose governors lesser provinces deferred. In the Roman cultural sphere of the time though, all roads lead to Rome ultimately.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
But if he wasn't the first pope, who was?
If there is a pope as Catholics claim, Peter was he. The question is not, "who was the first pope" but rather, "do you believe Catholic teaching regarding the papacy"?
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
St. Peter was bishop of Antioch first, wasn't he?

Primacy was assigned to Rome due to its importance as capitol city, wasn't it?

There is no doubt of a role of primacy assigned when all bishops convened (though St. James presided over the first Council because it took place in Jerusalem, where he was bishop). Someone has to call the meeting to order. But that never meant supreme authority or infallibility. St. Paul withstood St. Peter "to his face" because he was clearly wrong in the Judaizing scandal. And why call a council at all (as the Church has always done since the book of Acts) if supreme authority was supposed to rest in a human individual? Why not just ask the "pope" what to do, if such authority existed?

Because no mortal man is the head of the Church. That head is Jesus Christ. And if we believe His promise that the Holy Spirit would lead His Church into all truth, we can trust those councils that included any and all bishops, as Christianity did for centuries before major schisms.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The first person that was verifiably bishop of Rome and unequivocally was seen as an authority by other Christians, was Clement I in the late 1st century.
Maybe, but the question that has to be asked is "Why was he considered an authority?" It was not because he was deemed to be a Pope as we know that office.

I referred to the real explanation in an earlier post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ralliann
Upvote 0

Theloneranger79

New Member
Sep 15, 2018
3
2
44
Rison
✟7,823.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
ALWAYS default to Jesus when in doubt as the Word made flesh. What did he say? He said there is one Father who is in heaven.

Peter was chosen as a symbolic and allegorical foundation of the church. Apostle Paul said that as the husband is the head of the wife, so too is Christ the head of the Church.

Christ, not the Pope who sits on a golden throne between 2 angels claiming an infallible word (which is blasphemy).
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Kaon
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
We need to remember that this is the Christian History forum. The question is about the first person to have the position of Pope as we know that office. It isn't whether or not we think the idea of a pope is right or wrong.
 
Upvote 0

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
11,444
3,769
Eretz
✟317,023.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Yes, but James wasn't given the charge to tend Christ's sheep. As St. Chrysostom said, this charge was given to Peter and his successors.

And that has what to do with the Bishop of Rome? Remember, Peter was bishop in Antioch before he ever set foot in Rome. You do understand that Peter was told that 3 times because he denied him 3 times.
 
Upvote 0

FenderTL5

Κύριε, ἐλέησον.
Supporter
Jun 13, 2016
5,074
5,940
Nashville TN
✟631,633.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Maybe, but the question that has to be asked is "Why was he considered an authority?" It was not because he was deemed to be a Pope as we know that office.

I referred to the real explanation in an earlier post.
I think I understood your point; pope is the Latinized "papa" from the Greek word πάππας (pappa) which means "father." It was a term of endearment/respect for the Bishop in Rome before it became "The Pope" as an official title of an office. Your comment was to the latter.

Peter was the Bishop in Antioch prior to Rome.
 
Upvote 0

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
11,444
3,769
Eretz
✟317,023.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Maybe, but the question that has to be asked is "Why was he considered an authority?" It was not because he was deemed to be a Pope as we know that office.

I referred to the real explanation in an earlier post.

it was not a position of authority...it was a position of honor. First among EQUALS.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

tz620q

Regular Member
Supporter
Apr 19, 2007
2,658
1,038
Carmel, IN
✟567,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
First among EQUALS.

I've never really understood how someone can be first if all are truly equal. Another phrase that seems logically inconsistent is "The pope has a position of primacy, not supremacy." I suppose one could make the case that primacy is a referral to time of establishment; but Eusebius says that Peter was Bishop of Antioch before Rome, so that rules out a historical primacy. Another meaning might be, as I have heard said, he has a primacy of honor; but wouldn't that imply that other bishops are required to treat the Pope with more honor than they do other bishops. It is such a nebulous concept and yet it has stood in the divide between us for centuries. Perhaps it is time we start looking at this dispassionately and actually deriving how this would work; otherwise we let fuzzy words build hard walls.
 
Upvote 0