Ask a Question
or
Create a Poll
  1. Home /
  2. Questions /
  3. Social Sciences
  4. / Religions
  5. / Religions A - Z
  6. / Christian Religions
  7. / Christian Denominations
  8. / Catholic Religion
  9. / The Pope And The Vatican
  10. / Papal History

by prof. mes solzhenitsy on April 22nd, 2008

prof. mes solzhenitsy

Question

Help answer this question below.

A question of history: Do you know the first Pope's name?

  • Like
  • Report
Share:
Other

Answers. 10 helpful answers below.

  • by singwell-is off researching a lot on April 23rd, 2008

    singwell-is off researching a lot

    That depends on whether you accept the Roman Catholic teaching that St Peter was first Pope. I think that History shows this to be an anachronism. Though Peter may have founded Christianity in Rome (we do not know- certainly he makes no claim to it; besides, he is also claimed to be the founder of other centres such as Antioch), there was no POPE in Peter's time. There was no POPE until well after the 5th century. The title was not used. Church leaders were called presbuteros (elder) and episkopos (shepherd) in the first and second centuries of Christianity. As centres developed in the 3rd and 4th centuries, there came to be acknowledge 5 premier cities: Jerusalem, Antioch, Byzantium, Rome and Alexandria. The leaders of these centres were called patriarchs.

    • Like
    • Report

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by JohnDough on April 23rd, 2008

    JohnDough

    Simon, renamed to Peter (Cephas in Aramaic) by Christ.

    The early Protestant Church Historian J. D. Kelly said "Where in practice was the apostolic testimony or tradition to be found?... The most obvious answer was that the apostles had committed it orally to the Church, where it had been handed down from generation to generation... Unlike the alleged secret tradition of the Gnostics, it was entirely public and open, having been entrusted by the apostles to their successors, and by these in turn to those who followed them, and was visible in the Church for all who cared to look for it".

    In 80 A.D. Clement I wrote "Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry" (Letter to the Corinthians 42:4–5, 44:1–3).

    In 180 A.D., Hegesippus wrote "When I had come to Rome, I visited Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus. And after Anicetus died, Soter succeeded, and after him Eleutherus. In each succession and in each city there is a continuance of that which is proclaimed by the law, the prophets, and the Lord" (Memoirs, Ecclesiastical History 4:22).

    In 220 A.D., Tertullian wrote "The Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven and whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ (Matthew 16:18–19)... Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loosed, not what they shall have bound or they shall have loosed" (Modesty 21:9–10).

    In 221 A.D., Clement wrote the following to James "Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon (Peter), who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was, by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first-fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect"

    In 248 A.D. Origen wrote "If we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter... a great difference and a preeminence in the things (Jesus) said to Peter, compared with the second class (of apostles). For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in (all) the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens" (Commentary on Matthew 13:31).

    In 251 A.D. Cyprian wrote "The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’... On him 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, but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all (the apostles) are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he 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).

    • Like
    • Report

    4 comments | Post one | Permalink

  • by Perryman on April 22nd, 2008

    Perryman

    According to the Vatican, Peter was the first Pope.
    His role is perceived quite differently than he is mentioned in the Bible.
    Here are the names of the first four Popes , and the years that they held office.

    St. Peter (32-67) • St. Linus (67-76) Who is only mentioned once in the Bible at 2 Timothy 4:21 – yet goes on to become Pope?

    • St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88) • St. Clement I (88-97)
    There is nothing to suggest that Linus, or anyone else, was a papal successor to Peter. The apostle John, who penned five books of the Bible in the last decade of the first century, made no reference to any of the above so-called successors of Peter. Indeed, if there was a successor to Peter, would not the logical choice have been John himself?

    As to the claim that Peter was the first bishop of Rome, there is no proof that he even visited that city. In fact, Peter himself states that he wrote his first letter from Babylon. (1 Peter 5:13)

    Remember too, that Peter never referred to himself as anything more than one of Christ’s apostles. (2 Peter 1:1)
    Nowhere in the Bible is he addressed as “Holy Father,” “Supreme Pontiff,” or “Pope” (Latin, papa, an affectionate term for “Father”).
    Instead, he humbly adhered to Jesus’ words at Matthew 23:9, 10: “Moreover, do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One. Neither be called ‘leaders,’ for your Leader is one, the Christ.” Peter did not accept veneration.

    When Roman centurion Cornelius “fell down at his feet and did obeisance to him . . . , Peter lifted him up, saying: ‘Rise; I myself am also a man.’”—Acts 10:25, 26.

    • Like
    • Report

    2 comments | Post one | Permalink

  • by Redeemed77 on April 30th, 2008

    Redeemed77

    Peter was never a Pope, that is old typical Catholic propaganda! Do some research in History, if you really want to find the truth, you have to begin looking. Research Peters life & death, that will give you a good clue!

    • Like
    • Report

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by Rick on April 29th, 2008

    Rick

    The first Pope name was Boniface III A.D. 607. The Pope is not from scripture,but man made as so all religions. GOD created us for a relationship and through Faith we worship him. Christianity is not a religion.

    • Like
    • Report

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by iwnit on April 23rd, 2008

    iwnit

    "The origin of the Papacy is unclear. It is generally accepted amongst most Catholic and non-Catholic historians that the institution of the papacy as it exists today developed through the centuries. Church tradition holds that St. Peter the apostle arrived in Rome c. 50. During the first century of the Christian Church, the Roman capital became recognized as a Christian center of exceptional note since the church of Rome was reputed to be founded by the apostles St. Paul and St. Peter, the "prince of the apostles". Despite the special status of the church of Rome, there are only a few 1st century references to the recognition of the authoritative primacy of the Roman See outside of Rome."

    "The doctrines of Papal authority and Primacy of the Roman Pontiff continue to be sources of controversy between the Catholic Church and other Christian Churches."

    "Before a strict hierarchy was in place, an increasing number of people had conflicting views over what they felt was true about Christianity. The position of bishop came about as a part of efforts to establish what Christianity was believed to be, and to ensure that it was preserved. By the end of the first century AD, single bishops were appearing in major cities; these bishops were supported by colleges of "elders."

    There is no evidence that, once Peter arrived in Rome, he functioned as any sort of administrative or theological leader — certainly not as a “bishop” in the way we understand the term today. All available evidence points to the existence not of a monoepiscopal structure but instead to committees of elders (presbyteroi / πρεσβυτεροι) or overseers (episkopoi / επίσκoποι). This was standard in Christian communities all over the Roman empire.

    Not until a couple of decades into the second century do letters from Ignatius of Antioch describe churches led by a single bishop who was merely assisted by the presbyters and deacons. Even when a single bishop can definitively be identified as "the bishop of Rome," his powers were nothing like the powers of the pope today. In the early days of the church, the bishop of Rome didn’t call councils, didn’t issue encyclicals, and wasn’t sought after to resolve disputes about the nature of Christian faith.

    According to James L. Barker, the position of the bishop of Rome was not regarded as significantly different from the bishops of Antioch or Jerusalem. He contends that, insofar as the bishop of Rome was accorded any special status, it was more as a mediator than as a ruler; and that people appealed to the bishop of Rome to help mediate disputes arising over issues like Gnosticism, not to deliver a definitive statement of Christian orthodoxy. Perhaps one reason for this is that, whereas the Eastern church was a hotbed of heresy, no major heresy had ever been embraced by the Bishop of Rome. Though Marcionism and Valentinianism were heresies arising in or around Rome, their founders were excommunicated, not embraced."

    "In 42 A.D., Peter built a church in Rome while he was visiting Simon Magus. Dogma and traditions of the Catholic Church maintain that he served as the bishop of Rome for 25 years until 67 A.D. when he was martyred by Nero (further information: Great Fire of Rome). Roman Catholic tradition asserts that Jesus essentially appointed Peter as the first pope."
    Source and further information:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Papacy

    Further information:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primacy_of_the_Roman_Pontiff
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primacy_of_Simon_Peter
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Peter
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope

    • Like
    • Report

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by latinachica on May 1st, 2008

    latinachica

    dont know and dont care and honestly, dont take this in to deffinse, but he was no propht of god and had no athority from or of god so what dose it matter

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by philosopher-saint on April 29th, 2008

    philosopher-saint

    I'll take nonsequiturs for $200, Alex! ;-)

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by James_P1099 on October 6th, 2011

    James_P1099

    S.Linus, if you believe the martyr S. Ignatius.

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by Vampyre Bat on May 1st, 2008

    Vampyre Bat

    The Apostle Peter was the first pope.

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

Want to attach an image to your answer? Click here.

Did this answer your question? If not, then ask a new question or create a poll.

More Questions. Additional questions in this category.

You're reading A question of history: Do you know the first Pope's name?

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Ads

Related Questions

Professionally Researched

ANSWERBAG BUZZ

Modesty 21 9 10
First pope date
First popes name
Simon magus first pope
Name first pope

Answerbag

a Demand Media company