• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Peter as the first Pope or bishop of Rome

christian-surfer

Active Member
Apr 8, 2020
189
61
62
Marlborough, MA
✟29,259.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Wasn’t saying that having a stone building was proof of holiness or that there was no corruption in the Catholic Church or Protestant church’s for that matter but that it is just evidence that Peter probably was the first Bishop of Rome. What came after that is a different matter. On the other hand there was some good Popes just like there are some good Protestant ministers
 
Upvote 0

christian-surfer

Active Member
Apr 8, 2020
189
61
62
Marlborough, MA
✟29,259.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
I am mostly entirely influenced by Protestant interpretations of scriptures but the Protestants use definitions of the trinity that evolved from the Catholic Church through numerous conflicts with heretics. Protestants apparently rejected monasticism as well with many criticisms such as those posted below. Perhaps many such criticisms are not inaccurate but many or most of the original apostles where monastics. I believe that Luther also believed that polygamy was not forbidden by scripture. None of this is to say that I am condemning the Protestant religion or any religion except that religions it’s developments has some complexity. The Protestant religion is apparently the result of the modern printing press in many ways


——————




Protestant negativity toward monasticism can be traced back to the Reformers, particularly Martin Luther. Luther was himself a monk, and after his conversion, he became progressively more opposed to the practice. In 1537, he wrote that monastic vows "must be absolutely abolished." He also frequently and enthusiastically attacked monasticism in his writings and sermons.

Other reformers, like John Calvin, followed him. Calvin devotes a large portion of Book 4, Chapter 13 of his Institutes to the question. He speaks somewhat favorably of Augustine's depictions of early monasticism, but he widely criticizes the 16th-century version, saying that "no order of men is more polluted by all sorts of foul vices" (4.13.15) and using words like "abominable" and "pestilential" to describe monasticism and its errors (4.13.12).
 
Upvote 0

jas3

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2023
981
746
The South
✟69,541.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
This was an interesting podcast episode. It says that evidence that Peter was the first pope is in part because Saint Peter’s Basilica is so very large compared to other tombs such as that of Paul etc

I've listened to this episode. Catholic Culture consistently has excellent presentations. The point you make about St. Peter's basilica being large in comparison to St. Paul's tomb doesn't quite do the video justice; the point there was that Roman Christians had a closer affinity for Peter than Paul. The main argument of the video is that there is no other Christian tradition - i.e., the historical writings we have all point to Peter having gone to Rome and consider him its first bishop - and the idea that there was no bishop of Rome or that Peter never went to Rome is an invention of modern hyper-skeptical academics.
 
Upvote 0

jas3

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2023
981
746
The South
✟69,541.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Construction of Saint Peter’s Basilica started in 1506.
That's the current basilica. The Old Basilica that was there previously was built in the 4th century and was demolished in 1505 due to having become structurally unsound.
 
Upvote 0

ozso

*
Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
24,583
13,566
PNW
✟835,923.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
That's the current basilica. The Old Basilica that was there previously was built in the 4th century and was demolished in 1505 due to having become structurally unsound.
That was just the beginning of a draft. I didn't mean to post it.
 
Upvote 0

christian-surfer

Active Member
Apr 8, 2020
189
61
62
Marlborough, MA
✟29,259.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
I've listened to this episode. Catholic Culture consistently has excellent presentations. The point you make about St. Peter's basilica being large in comparison to St. Paul's tomb doesn't quite do the video justice; the point there was that Roman Christians had a closer affinity for Peter than Paul. The main argument of the video is that there is no other Christian tradition - i.e., the historical writings we have all point to Peter having gone to Rome and consider him its first bishop - and the idea that there was no bishop of Rome or that Peter never went to Rome is an invention of modern hyper-skeptical academics.

That seems consistent with what that episode was saying yes
 
Upvote 0

Adventist Heretic

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Sep 18, 2006
5,360
518
Parts Unknown
✟455,818.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Peter was the first bishop of Rome because he was the first bishop/ pope of the Church. At Pentecost delegates from all over the world came to Jerusalem. It was at the temple during Pentecost that The Holy Spirit came up on Peter and he preached and 3000 were converted in a day. Among those were people from Rome and other parts of the empire., who went back to there cities and founded Churches so yes Peter was the first pope and Bishop of the Church including Rome.
 
Upvote 0

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
14,358
6,487
Massachusetts
✟627,549.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
That's the current basilica. The Old Basilica that was there previously was built in the 4th century and was demolished in 1505 due to having become structurally unsound.
Well, Peter at first was unsound enough to deny Jesus three times . . . right? But the Peter he became later was bigger and more solid. So, we could argue that the ruined church replaced by the present great one could be a symbolic indication that Peter was a pope.

B-u-t > it appears to me that James in Jerusalem was a chief leader. And Paul is our Apostle to the Gentiles, and Peter to the Jews (Galatians 2:8). So, we might argue, then, that neither was a pope, but each was specialized as an apostle.

Also, we have how Paul had to stand up to Peter when Peter played the hypocrite at Antioch > Galatians 2:11-13. That was not very solid of Peter. But God used Paul to preside in that situation.

But then, I believe, Peter got real correction and maturity so he became able to write his two epistles. These are works, I see, of a man who has gained from real correction by God and who has been inspired and has experienced the meaning of what he has written.

Plus, we have that time in Acts when they disputed about Gentiles needing to be circumcised, and God used Peter to settle the matter. He was used to lead the church in that situation. And there was unanimous agreement once God had used Peter.

But have there been "popes" so used with unanimous agreement? Not according to the history which I have been told. Not to mention, it seems standards have been let down quite a way, in order to justify that certain men were considered to be popes . . . who never gained real correction . . . and did not meet the basic qualifications Paul give in 1 Timothy 3:1-10 and were not "examples to the flock" as Peter requires in 1 Peter 5:3.

Possibly, then, ones since Peter have not really been popes, if they have not functioned like him plus have not been so effectively corrected like Peter was corrected by Paul.

Peter was known personally, not distant and out of touch. So, possibly he is the only pope we have had.
 
Upvote 0

JEBofChristTheLord

to the Lord
Site Supporter
Nov 28, 2005
633
195
56
Topeka, Kansas, USA
Visit site
✟109,194.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"Bishop" is not "Pope".

And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.
Matthew 23:9
 
Upvote 0

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
23,720
8,886
up there
✟349,319.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Peter may have denied etc but James was the head of the Jerusalem church theoretically making him the first pope. But I guess he never got to Rome so he doesn't count. Seems Judah counts for nothing when it comes to the religion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jerry N.
Upvote 0

Jerry N.

Active Member
Sep 25, 2024
316
106
Brzostek
✟14,640.00
Country
Poland
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Peter may have denied etc but James was the head of the Jerusalem church theoretically making him the first pope. But I guess he never got to Rome so he doesn't count. Seems Judah counts for nothing when it comes to the religion.
James was certainly the first leader of the church, but the problem is the definition of “Pope.” The video said that the first bishop of Rome was the first pope. What is the proper definition of “Pope’ according to you or anybody else.

Here is one answer:

“The answer given by Dr. Ahmes L. Pahor, Birmingham, to that newspaper question was, "While Siricius (384-399) is thought to have been the first Bishop of Rome to style himself Pope, he is not the first to have used the title. This appears to have originated in the East, in Alexandria, one of the main four seats of patriarchs at the time. Heraclas, Bishop of Alexandria (231-247), appointed 22 bishops to oversee Egypt, apart from Alexandria, his own diocese. He needed to take this action as the Egyptians turned to Christianity in great numbers and there was a need to have other bishops to help Heraclas administer the ever-growing Coptic Church. The Alexandrians saw Heraclas as 'father of the fathers' or 'papa', and thus the title 'pope' was bestowed on him by his congregation in the first half of the third century (about 150 years before Siricius)."

However, I read elsewhere that Pope Damasus took the title "Supreme Pontiff" in 380, for the first time. Yet I understand Catholics say that St. Miltiades was named Pope on 2 July 311, and Marcellinus (who died 304) was also called Pope. I’m just so confused as to when the title of Pope was bestowed, but not retrospectively.”

 
Upvote 0

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
23,720
8,886
up there
✟349,319.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
What Jesus started was a movement, not a religion, and movements kind of lead themselves. Human institutions require leaders but this was not human but the good news of the Kingdom of God which was a counter-culture to the ways of humans, God's will over the will of man. It hardly makes sense making it into yet another human institution any more than it makes sense to try and solve the troublesome ways of mankind using the same ways of mankind that started the trouble in the first place. But I guess this is how the Adversary maintains control for now while we say lord lord instead of His Kingdom come, His will be done in earth. Just because mankind says something in this matter, doesn't make it so. Truth comes from only the Father, the key to the Kingdom.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Jerry N.

Active Member
Sep 25, 2024
316
106
Brzostek
✟14,640.00
Country
Poland
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
What Jesus started was a movement, not a religion, and movements kind of lead themselves. Human institutions require leaders but this was not human but the good news of the Kingdom of God which was a counter-culture to the ways of humans, God's will over the will of man. It hardly makes sense making it into yet another human institution any more than it makes sense to try and solve the troublesome ways of mankind using the same ways of mankind that started the trouble in the first place. But I guess this is how the Adversary maintains control for now while we say lord lord instead of His Kingdom come, His will be done in earth. Just because mankind says something in this matter, doesn't make it so. Truth comes from only the Father, the key to the Kingdom.
You are quite right. I always thought of religion being man-made and faith made by God. I know that is a gross oversimplification. As soon as a faith becomes institutionalized, it goes downhill. It is part of human nature, but God is just, merciful, and knows the heart. I know that there have been good popes, but there are a lot of bad apples in the basket.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: timothyu
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
38,983
28,346
Pacific Northwest
✟784,153.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
This was an interesting podcast episode. It says that evidence that Peter was the first pope is in part because Saint Peter’s Basilica is so very large compared to other tombs such as that of Paul etc


There's little reason to doubt that the episcopate in Rome can be traced back to St. Peter; just as the episcopate in Antioch is traced back to both Peter and Paul; and the episcopate in Jerusalem goes back to St. James (etc.).

The issue of the Papacy, however, is very different. That Peter was the first bishop of Rome and that the bishop of Rome sits in St. Peter's chair is rooted in Christian history. We even can see how, very often, in the ancient Church the bishops of Rome were highly respected as defenders of Christian orthodoxy, and often highly honored. What we lack, in the ancient record of the Church, is any notion of any bishop having anything resembling a universal authority over the whole Church. In fact we actually have, from the words of those men who have sat in St. Peter's chair, statements to the contrary. St. Gregory the Great, when John IV of Constantinople tried to claim a position of headship over the whole Church, fiercely criticized him, and went so far as to say that any man who would try to claim be a universal pastor over the Church would be like a forerunner to the Antichrist. The ancient Canons of the first Ecumenical Councils are clear that while Rome is highly honored, the dioceses of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem are also highly honored (this is the root of what is known as the historic Pentarchy).

The assumption of greater ecclesiastical, and even political, power are later innovations that entered into the Western Church, largely after much of the political power of the East had been broken, and there was a growing schism between East and West. The beginnings of this schism show up at least as early as the Photian Controversy in the 9th century, but was truly seen in the Great Schism dated to 1054 over the Filioque Controversy; and was effectively completed by the time of the Council of Florence in the in the 15th century. After the Western Schism (aka the Papal Schism, in which there was at one point three competing claims to the Papal throne) there was a fairly rapid accumulation of Papal authority, resulting in the death of the Conciliar Movement, a reinvigoration of Papal political and ecclesiastical authority, and which has continued into modern times (e.g. the First Vatican Council in the 19th century which established Papal Infallibility as dogma).

That the bishops of Rome are the successors of St. Peter and sit in his apostolic chair isn't the controversy. It's all the unique powers and particular claims about the supremacy of St. Peter's Chair which came much later, and have evolved and grown over the centuries, that are the heart of the controversy. This is what both the Eastern Churches and the mainstream Churches of the Reformation take issue with. That the Papacy is by its very nature contrary to the faith and practice of the Historic Catholic Church of Jesus Christ. The Church of Jesus Christ only has one Head, and that's Jesus Christ Himself, who rules and reigns at the right hand of the Father, and over His whole Church on earth and in heaven as Lord, King, and God. He is her Shepherd, He is her Foundation and Rock. No bishop, no pastor, can claim to be what belongs solely to Christ: The universal Headship of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0