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

[pescador]

Nice strawman.

The same to you.

 

[Philip_B]

The earliest witness to the episcopate of Linus was Irenaeus, who in c. AD 180 wrote that "the blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate." The Oxford Dictionary of Popes mentions that according to the earliest succession lists of bishops of Rome, passed down by Irenaeus and Hegesippus and attested by the historian Eusebius, he was entrusted with his office by the Apostles Peter and Paul after they had established the Christian church in Rome. By this primitive reckoning he was therefore the first pope, but from the late 2nd or early 3rd century the convention began of regarding Peter as first pope. Jerome described Linus as "the first after Peter to be in charge of the Roman Church" and Eusebius described him as "the first to receive the episcopate of the church at Rome, after the martyrdom of Paul and Peter". John Chrysostom wrote that "this Linus, some say, was second Bishop of the Church of Rome after Peter", while the Liberian Catalogue described Peter as the first Bishop of Rome and Linus as his successor in the same office.​

The Liber Pontificalis also enumerated Linus as the second Bishop of Rome after Peter, and stated that Peter consecrated 2 bishops, Linus and Cletus/Anacletus for the priestly service of the community, while devoting himself instead to prayer and preaching, and that it was Clement to whom he entrusted the universal Church and appointed as his successor. Tertullian also wrote of Clement as the successor of Peter. Jerome named Clement as "the fourth bishop of Rome after Peter, if indeed the second was Linus and the third Anacletus, although most of the Latins think that Clement was second after the apostle."

Pope Linus - Wikipedia​

 

[Aspect]

So, a secondary source.

The book is secondary, but the author read the primary sources and translated.

 

[Aspect]

Philip_B,

Greek liturgical offices commemorate St. Peter’s episcopate in Rome. Texts for the feast of St. Peter’s chains, on January 16, proclaim:

"Supreme foundation of the apostles, You left all things, following the Master, Crying out to him, “With thee I shall die, So as to live the life of the blessed.” And you became the first bishop of Rome, Foundation and pillar of the most orthodox of cities, and firmament of the Church of Christ. And the gates of hell shall not shake it, As Christ proclaimed." [Ed. J.B. Pitra. Hymnographie de l’Eglise Grècque, Rome 1867, LVII].

Instead of listing the succession of bishops in each apostolic church, St. Irenaeus gave a sort of short cut: the succession in the Roman Church. The saint wrote:

..."because it would take too long, in this sort of book, to list the successions of all the Churches, by indicating the apostolic tradition and faith announced to mankind, which has reached our own time through successions of bishops, in the greatest, most ancient church known to all, founded and established at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, we confound all who in any way— either for self-pleasing or vainglory, or blindness or evil teaching— gather otherwise than they ought. For to this church on account of the more powerful principality it is necessary that every church convene, that is the faithful from all sides, in which, always, that which is the tradition from the apostles has been preserved by those who are from all parts." [PG 7: 848-9].

 

[prodromos]

The book is secondary, but the author read the primary sources and translated.

As did the author of the source I gave earlier, Henry Robert Percival. I honestly wonder whether you are able to admit the double standard you hold to.

 

[prodromos]

Greek liturgical offices commemorate St. Peter’s episcopate in Rome. Texts for the feast of St. Peter’s chains, on January 16, proclaim:

"Supreme foundation of the apostles, You left all things, following the Master, Crying out to him, “With thee I shall die, So as to live the life of the blessed.” And you became the first bishop of Rome, Foundation and pillar of the most orthodox of cities, and firmament of the Church of Christ. And the gates of hell shall not shake it, As Christ proclaimed." [Ed. J.B. Pitra. Hymnographie de l’Eglise Grècque, Rome 1867, LVII].

An English translation of a French translation of a Greek text? Somebody earlier stated:

"Secondary source. I wouldn't uncritically accept everything it says."​

so given that this is tertiary at best, do you think we should dismiss it?

Instead of listing the succession of bishops in each apostolic church, St. Irenaeus gave a sort of short cut: the succession in the Roman Church. The saint wrote:

..."because it would take too long, in this sort of book, to list the successions of all the Churches, by indicating the apostolic tradition and faith announced to mankind, which has reached our own time through successions of bishops, in the greatest, most ancient church known to all, founded and established at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, we confound all who in any way— either for self-pleasing or vainglory, or blindness or evil teaching— gather otherwise than they ought. For to this church on account of the more powerful principality it is necessary that every church convene, that is the faithful from all sides, in which, always, that which is the tradition from the apostles has been preserved by those who are from all parts." [PG 7: 848-9].

I recommend you read the analysis of the above passage by Abbe Guettée.

 

[Aspect]

Is the pope head of the church?

More information refuting the claim that popes were never considered head of the church.

The Emperor Justinian wrote to Epiphanius of Constantinople: "Wishing that Your Holiness be informed of everything pertaining to ecclesiastical affairs, we have deemed it necessary to inform you by these present divine letters of matters of which you are already undoubtedly aware, namely that we have come across men still professing the error of Nestorius and of Eutyches, and that we have published an edict against the heretics, commanding in all things to preserve the unity of the holy churches with the most holy pope and patriarch of Old Rome, to whom we have written likewise. For we do not allow anything pertaining to ecclesiastical order not to be reported to His Beatitude, since he is head of all the holy priests of God, and because, as often as heretics have arisen in these parts, they have been condemned by the sentence and right judgment of that venerable throne... [Codex Iustinianus I 1, 7. Ed. P. Krueger, Corpus Iuris Civilis, Berlin 1882, Vol. II, 8].

On June 6, 533, Justinian wrote a letter to Pope John II [532-535], which was brought by two bishops, Hypatius of Ephesus and Demetrius of Philippi. The emperor remarked, "Rendering honor to the Apostolic See and to Your Holiness, which ever has been and is our desire, and honoring Your Beatitude as befits a father, we have hastened to bring whatever is related to the state of the churches to the knowledge of Your Holiness, because it has ever been our great care that the unity of your apostolic see, and the state of God’s holy churches which has obtained up to now be preserved, without any contradiction. And therefore we have hastened both to subject and to unite all the priests of the entire eastern district to the see of Your Holiness. And therefore have deemed it necessary that now the issues raised here be brought to the knowledge of Your Holiness, although they are manifest and beyond question, and have always been firmly observed and preached by all priests, and in accordance with the doctrine of your holy see. For we do not allow anything pertaining to the state of the churches, no matter how manifest and unquestionable it may be, to fail to be brought to the knowledge of Your Holiness, who are head of all the holy churches. For in all respects, as has been said, we hasten to increase the honor and authority of your see. [Codex Iustinianus I 1, 8. Corpus Iuris Civilis, Berlin 1882, Vol. II, 11].

In March 534, Pope John II congratulated Justinian, writing: "Among the glorious praises of your wisdom and meekness, most Christian of princes, [is the fact that] you preserve the reverence due the See of Rome and subject everything to it, and bring them back to that unity whose author— that is, the first of the apostles— was commanded by the voice of the Lord: Feed my sheep. That this see is truly head of the Churches, both the rules of the Fathers and the statutes of princes declare... [Codex Iustinianus I 1, 8. Corpus Iuris Civilis, Berlin 1882, Vol. II, 10].

Stephen bishop of dora stated: "And for this cause, we sometimes asked for... the wings of a dove... that we might fly away and announce these things to that Chair which rules and presides over all, that is to yours, the head and highest... For this it has been accustomed to do from of old and from the beginning with power by its canonical or spiritual authority, because the truly great Peter, leader of the apostles, clearly was deemed worthy not only to be entrusted with the keys of heaven, alone [and] apart from the rest, worthily to open it to believers, or justly to close it to those who do not believe in the gospel of grace, but because he was also the first one commissioned to feed the sheep of the entire Catholic Church, for He says, “Peter, do you love me? Feed my sheep.” And again, because he had in a peculiar and special manner a faith in the Lord stronger than all and unchangeable, to be converted and to confirm his fellows and spiritual brethren when tossed about, as having been adorned for us by God Incarnate Himself with power and priestly authority... And Sophronius of blessed memory, who was patriarch of the holy city of Christ our God [Jerusalem], and under whom I was bishop, conferring not with flesh and blood but caring only for the things of Christ with respect to Your Holiness, hastened to send my nothingness without delay about this matter alone to this great and Apostolic See"... [Mansi X, 893].

John, abbot of St. Sabas: “this is why we urge and implore you all, most holy fathers, and the apostolic and highest throne” to anathematize the heretics. “The hearts of all look to you, after God, knowing that you have been established by Christ our God as leader and head of the churches.” [Mansi X, 905- 8]. Notice, this authority comes from Christ.

Pope Stephen IV, “supreme pontiff and universal pope,” called upon the head notary, Christopher, to address the council. The text prepared by Christopher, which proclaimed the Roman Church the “see of Peter, prince of the apostles,” and “head and ruler of all the churches of God,” explained how Duke Toto, violating a sworn oath, had invaded the Apostolic See, illegally installing Constantine as a false pope. The council decreed that for the future, “in accordance with what was established by Blessed Peter and his successors,” only Cardinal priests or deacons could be elected to the “height of the apostleship.” The intruder Constantine was deposed and blinded. The council also condemned iconoclasm. [Hefele 5: 336 sq.; Mansi 12: 715 sq.].

Although Pope Leo letter expressed unhappiness that Tarasius had been rushed through the orders against the canons, the pope was pleased at his orthodox faith. Condemning iconoclasm as contrary to the tradition of the Fathers and the authority of the Apostolic See, the pope cited Mt. 16, 18: “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church...” adding, “his see is preeminent throughout the world, holding the primacy, and is head of all the churches of God. Wherefore the same Blessed Peter the apostle, by the Lord’s command feeding the sheep... ever held and does retain the primacy,” and, “if your holiness wishes to adhere to him, and is endeavoring to keep the sacred and orthodox faith... of our apostolic see, which is head of all the churches of God,” then urge the rulers to restore the veneration of images. [Mansi 12: 1077-84].

St. Theodore explained at length that the ‘heresy of adultery’ is the negation of both the Old and New Testaments, and insisted: "O most blessed one, a synod has been held... for the condemnation of the Gospel, the keys of which you have received, through the mediation of the leader [protostatou] of the apostles, and his successors up to him who preceded your most sacred head... We, the humble children of the Catholic Church, believed that it was necessary to inform you about this— you, the first [of pastors] and our apostolic head." [PG 99: 1021, 1025].

Theodore and several other archimandrites, faced with a new outbreak of iconoclasm, had appealed to Pope Paschal:

"Your supreme beatitude has undoubtedly learned what misfortune our sins have drawn down upon our church. We have become, to speak as the Scripture, the conversation and proverb of all the nations, but perhaps you have not been fully informed by letter. This is why we lowly monks, and the least among the members of Christ, since our chief is a prisoner and the first among our fathers are scattered hither and thither, have been able, thanks to your vicinity and our common agreement in mind and words, to write you this letter, although it be very bold. Listen, O apostolic head, divinely established shepherd of Christ’s sheep, doorkeeper of the heavenly kingdom, rock of the faith on which the Catholic Church has been built. For you are Peter— you are the successor of Peter, whose throne you grace and direct. Cruel wolves have broken into the Lord’s flock, and hell has risen up against it as [never] before... Come to our assistance, and do not repulse us forever... To you did Christ our God say, “When you have been converted, strengthen your brethren.” Now is the time and the place: help us, you who have been established by God for that purpose... May the church which is under heaven learn that those who have had this audacity, and who anathematize our holy fathers, are struck with anathema. You would do a work thereby pleasing to God, it would be a joy for saints and angels, a support for those who waver, a confirmation for those who are strong, a resurrection for those who have fallen, a joy for the entire orthodox church, and for your position as chiefest [koruphaioteti], according to the expression of those of old, eternal memory. [PG 99: 1152-3].

Pope Gregory proclaims that the Apostolic See is “head of all the churches.” [Epp. XIII, 45. PL 77, 1298].

Pope Gregory, who died in 604, is one of only three popes called “Great.” The Byzantine Church commemorates “our holy father Gregory, Pope of Rome,” on March 12. [Menaion, March, Athens 1904, 73].

Alcuin Albinus, a monk originally from York and leading liturgist at Charlemagne’s court, wrote: ...lest [anyone] be found a schismatic or non-Catholic, let him follow the most reliable authority of the Roman Church, so that we may ever have the examples of our salvation from where we received the commencement of the Catholic faith. Let not the members be separated from the head; let not the key-bearer of the heavenly kingdom cast out those whom he knows to have strayed from his teachings. [Ep. 90. PL 100: 293].

The Vita Tertia adds that St. Patrick “wanted to visit Rome, head of all the churches, to which Christians converged from all parts of the world,” and that Germanus approved of this wish. [Ed. Bieler, SLH 8: 77, 130-31].

In the last century, the Bollandists published a codex from Brussels containing Muirchu’s Life of St. Patrick. The Brussels codex contained parts of Muirchu’s tract which seem to have been lost, and thus do not appear in the Book of Armagh. Chapter four from the Brussels codex mentions how St. Patrick went out “to visit and honor the Apostolic See, the head of all the churches of the entire world"... [Ed. E. Hogan. AB 1 (1882), 552].

 

[prodromos]

The Coptic Pope is titled "Judge of the Universe", so I guess that puts him above the Catholic Pope who is only head of the churches of the world.

 

[Albion]

Is the pope head of the church?

The Emperor Justinian wrote to Epiphanius of Constantinople:

Pope Gregory, who died in 604, is one of only three popes called “Great.” The Byzantine Church commemorates “our holy father Gregory, Pope of Rome,” on March 12. [Menaion, March, Athens 1904, 73].

Alcuin Albinus, a monk originally from York and leading liturgist at Charlemagne’s court, wrote: ...lest [anyone] be found a schismatic or non-Catholic, let him follow the most reliable authority of the Roman Church,

Chapter four from the Brussels codex mentions how St. Patrick went out “to visit and honor the Apostolic See, the head of all the churches of the entire world"... [Ed. E. Hogan. AB 1 (1882), 552].

Yes, we know that at some point in time, long after Peter, the bishops of Rome succeeded in establishing themselves as the rulers of the Western Church and, arguably, of the whole church.

But that doesn't prove anything other than that the Papacy as we know it was late in coming into being. These references you've given us show that to be the case.

 

[Aspect]

The Coptic Pope is titled "Judge of the Universe", so I guess that puts him above the Catholic Pope who is only head of the churches of the world.

Cite the primary source reference, name the individual who made the claim, the date, and give evidence that the universal church (including the pope of Rome) accepted the claim.

 

[Aspect]

Yes, we know that at some point in time, long after Peter, the bishops of Rome succeeded in establishing themselves as the rulers of the Western Church and, arguably, of the whole church.

But that doesn't prove anything other than that the Papacy as we know it was late in coming into being. These references you've given us show that to be the case.

No, the universal church accepted the claims. The east never separated from the west, claiming the west were heretics.

The Formula of Pope Hormisdas (519) was accepted by the eastern churches. It reads as follows:

"The first condition of salvation is to keep the rule of the true faith, and not to deviate in any way from the tradition of the fathers. And because the teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ cannot be overlooked, which says: “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I shall build my Church,” these things which have been said are proven by the events, because in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved immaculate. Not wanting to fall away from this faith, and following the constitutions of the fathers in all respects, we anathematize all heresies, especially the heretic Nestorius, who was once bishop of the city of Constantinople, condemned at the Council of Ephesus by Celestine, pope of the city of Rome, and by the holy Cyril, bishop of Alexandria; and together with him we anathematize Eutyches and Dioscorus of Alexandria, who were condemned in the holy council of Chalcedon, which we follow and embrace. Along with them we anathematize Timothy the parricide [the Cat], surnamed Elurus, and his disciple and follower in all things, Peter [Mongus] of Alexandria. In like manner we condemn and anathematize Acacius, former bishop of the city of Constantinople, their accomplice and follower, as well as those who persevered in their communion, for whoever embraces the communion of (such) individuals receives a similar judgment at their condemnation. We also condemn Peter of Antioch [the Fuller], along with his followers... Consequently we receive and approve all the letters of the blessed Pope Leo, which he wrote concerning the true faith. Wherefore, as we have already said, following in all things the Apostolic See and preaching whatever has been decreed by it, I hope that I may deserve to be in one communion with you, which the Apostolic See preaches, in which is the complete and true solidity of the Christian religion. I also promise that during the celebration of the sacred mysteries, I shall not recite the names of those who were separated from the communion of the Catholic Church, that is, those who do not agree in every respect with the Apostolic See. This profession of faith I have signed with my own hand, and offered it to you, Hormisdas, holy and venerable pope of the city of Rome." [CSEL 35: 520-22].

Please note, as stated in this formula, the letters of Pope Leo were accepted by the east. His letters affirmed the Roman primacy.

The ancient Collectio Avellana, compiled about 550 signatures to the Formula of Hormisads, calls it a libellus or profession “which Pope Hormisdas laid down, to be given by all the bishops of Greece.” [CSEL 35: 800].

The Roman deacon Rusticus [c. 550] speaks of the libelli, or professions of faith, “of perhaps twenty-five hundred priests, under Emperor Justin, after the schism of Peter [Mongus] of Alexandria, and Acacius of Constantinople.” [PL 67, 1251-2]. It is difficult to say how much this figure may have been inflated by the inclusion of archimandrites and lesser clergy.

The formula of Hormisdas also required the bishops to accept the letters of Pope Leo, a condition the pope had laid down back in 515, when he had sent legates into the east. In his letters, Pope Leo had not only defined the faith and claimed to preside at the ecumenical council through his legates, he had expressly rejected canon 28 and defended the traditional order of sees, naming Antioch the third see and denying that Constantinople was a major see at all.

The formula signed by Justinian also included this clause regarding the pope: ..."following in all things the Apostolic See, we preach whatever it has laid down, and profess that these things shall be observed inviolably, and shall compel all the bishops to act in accordance with the content of this libellus: the patriarchs to Your Holiness, and metropolitans to the patriarchs, and the rest to their own metropolitans, so that our Catholic Church may have her solidity in all respects. [CSEL 35: 340].

The emperor’s profession of faith includes a clause “approving in all respects and embracing all the letters of Leo, of blessed memory, which he wrote concerning the Christian faith.” [CSEL 35: 339].

When Pope Hormisdas died in 523, his son Silverius, “captivated by the love of Peter,” wrote the late pontiff’s epitaph, eulogizing his father for healing the thirty-five year schism of Acacius [484-519]. “Greece yielded to thee,” wrote Silverius, “overcome by a pious command, rejoicing that she recovered a lost faith.” [ICUR 2: 130].

In September 516 John, bishop of Nicopolis, announced his ordination “to Hormisdas, prince of bishops.” Submitting a perfectly orthodox profession of faith, John wrote: Fittingly do I have recourse to your prayers, so that in accordance with the custom of your Apostolic See, you may deign to have the care of all the churches, and that of Nicopolis, according to your ancient spiritual disposition. [CSEL 35: 522].

 

[Aspect]

Cite the primary source reference, name the person making the claim, the date, and give evidence that the universal church (including the pope of Rome) accepted the claim.

I tried to delete this but could find no options for deleting a post.

 

[Aspect]

Cancelled post. Don't know how to delete.

 

[prodromos]

Cite the primary source reference, name the individual who made the claim, the date, and give evidence that the universal church (including the pope of Rome) accepted the claim.

No. I don't have a library of ancient texts at my disposal. I'll give you what is at hand and you can take it or leave it.

The Ecumenical Judge of the Holy Apostolic and Orthodox Church of God:

This was a title given to St. Alexander I (the 19th Archbishop of Alexandria), in honor of the canonical responsibilities bestowed upon the Primates of Alexandria thereafter, to determine the date of the Pascha, and to convey ecclesiastical letters of notification to all Hierarchies of the Universal Church, along with the Paschal encyclical. This was officially agreed upon and ratified at the Ecumenical First Council of Nicaea (325 AD).​

THEOPHILOS II (1010-1020)

During his tenure as Patriarch the persecution of Christians By Al Hakim became even more fierce, and many of them became Islamists or sought refuge in other countries. During these years, Theophilos was living in Constantinople as he could not stay in Egypt . He intervened in the dispute between Emperor Vasilios Voulgaroktonos (975-1025) and Patriarch Sergios II of Constantinople (999-1019) on whether or not to enforce the law of “solidarity”, and led the two to conciliation. From that time the Patriarch of Alexandria was given the title of “Judge of the Universe”, with the added privilege of wearing a second stole (Kritato).​

 

[prodromos]

Cancelled post. Don't know how to delete.

You can't delete posts.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The Formula of Pope Hormisdas (519) was accepted by the eastern churches. It reads as follows:

"The first condition of salvation is to keep the rule of the true faith, and not to deviate in any way from the tradition of the fathers. And because the teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ cannot be overlooked, which says: “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I shall build my Church,” these things which have been said are proven by the events, because in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved immaculate. Not wanting to fall away from this faith, and following the constitutions of the fathers in all respects, we anathematize all heresies, especially the heretic Nestorius, who was once bishop of the city of Constantinople, condemned at the Council of Ephesus by Celestine, pope of the city of Rome, and by the holy Cyril, bishop of Alexandria; and together with him we anathematize Eutyches and Dioscorus of Alexandria, who were condemned in the holy council of Chalcedon, which we follow and embrace. Along with them we anathematize Timothy the parricide [the Cat], surnamed Elurus, and his disciple and follower in all things, Peter [Mongus] of Alexandria. In like manner we condemn and anathematize Acacius, former bishop of the city of Constantinople, their accomplice and follower, as well as those who persevered in their communion, for whoever embraces the communion of (such) individuals receives a similar judgment at their condemnation. We also condemn Peter of Antioch [the Fuller], along with his followers... Consequently we receive and approve all the letters of the blessed Pope Leo, which he wrote concerning the true faith. Wherefore, as we have already said, following in all things the Apostolic See and preaching whatever has been decreed by it, I hope that I may deserve to be in one communion with you, which the Apostolic See preaches, in which is the complete and true solidity of the Christian religion. I also promise that during the celebration of the sacred mysteries, I shall not recite the names of those who were separated from the communion of the Catholic Church, that is, those who do not agree in every respect with the Apostolic See. This profession of faith I have signed with my own hand, and offered it to you, Hormisdas, holy and venerable pope of the city of Rome." [CSEL 35: 520-22].

I find it interesting that in none of the points underlined do we see an agreement by the Catholic Church that the bishop of Rome is the universal head of the Church.

We see the affirmation that the Apostolic See in Rome has preserved the true faith unstained, this is historically true--during the Christological controversies of the 4th and 5th centuries Rome remained firm in its orthodoxy.

We see that the writings of St. Leo were accepted as true and orthodox.

We see that the Roman See is the bastion of orthodoxy, or at least was at the time.

The justifications for the papacy rely on threads so thin and tenuous that it boggles the mind to see someone champion them with such confidence as though they've already won the argument.

The importance of the Roman See, historically, is not under dispute. Nobody questions the monumental importance which the See of St. Peter in Rome has played, historically, in the defense of Christological orthodoxy, and the defense of the Catholic faith. But that does not excuse the unlawful coopting of power and the extra-judicial claims, falsely promoted, by later occupants of St. Peter's chair. The papacy is not justified on the basis of the good things which faithful stewards of St. Peter's chair did historically for the Church of Jesus Christ.

And until the bishop of Rome humbles himself, divests himself of his false authority, and submits to the authority of the Church, it is a See in rebellion. If you find this language particularly harsh, I apologize my intent isn't mean-spirited or to promote hurt--but if the defenders of the papacy are going to accuse us who are not in communion with Rome of being in rebellion against the Church, then it must be permitted that we also who are being falsely charged defend ourselves and respond with earnest and honesty.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Malihah]

And until the bishop of Rome humbles himself, divests himself of his false authority, and submits to the authority of the Church, it is a See in rebellion. If you find this language particularly harsh, I apologize my intent isn't mean-spirited or to promote hurt--but if the defenders of the papacy are going to accuse us who are not in communion with Rome of being in rebellion against the Church, then it must be permitted that we also who are being falsely charged defend ourselves and respond with earnest and honesty.

-CryptoLutheran

'submits to the authority of the Church'. And what Church would this be? The Protestant churches that stole everything they have from Rome and then pawned it off as their own. Your bible came from Rome. Your Reformers came out of Rome. Your education came from Rome. Rome was here long before you came along so here is a proverb for you - 'the master does not bow to the wishes and dreams of his runaway slave'.

 

[Root of Jesse]

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

This was true until Constantine left Rome and took the Imperial Government with him. But still, many times in the first 12 generations of the Church, did different regions appeal to the Pope in Rome to help make decisions, and no decision of a Synod was good until the pope agreed to it.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

But still, many times in the first 12 generations of the Church, did different regions appeal to the Pope in Rome to help make decisions, and no decision of a Synod was good until the pope agreed to it.

Maybe in the West...

 

[Root of Jesse]

Maybe in the West...

Define that. St. Ignatius of Antioch, I believe, records just such an appeal to Rome. But in the first 12 generations of the Church there was no East/West, really. We have such a letter from St. Clement to the Corinthians.