0
What else can I help you with?
Who is peter roman empire?
S|t Peter was one of the apostles. It was said that he was the first bishop of Rome.
Was Peter the first pastor of the Christian church?
A:The most reliable evidence we have is found in Saint Paul's epistles, where he describes Peter as one of the three leaders ("pillars") of the Jerusalem church. There is no suggestion that he was the first or even most senior of the three.There is a tradition that Peter travelled to Rome and led the Church there, appointing Linus to succeed him as bishop of Rome. This would at least have made Peter an early pastor (but not the first) at Rome, however there is no evidence that Peter ever went to Rome. The author of 1 Clement, writing from Rome around the end of the first century, appears to have been unaware that Peter ever went to Rome. Even the story of Linus succeeding Peter as bishop of Rome appears to be a legend. Francis A. Sullivan SJ (From Apostles to Bishops) says that there is a general agreement among scholars that the church of Rome was led by a council of presbyters until well into the second century, with no evidence of a ruling bishop.
How did Peter affect popes after him?
A:A widely accepted tradition is that the apostle Peter travelled to Rome and led the Christian community there, becoming the first bishop of Rome and therefore first pope. Peter appointed Linus as his successor as bishop of Rome, and there was then a continuous line of bishops right down to the present day. However, this is no longer the way most scholars, including Catholic scholars, see it.Francis A. Sullivan SJ (From Apostles to Bishops) says that it is the consensus of scholars that the church of Rome was led by a college of presbyters, rather than a single bishop, for at least several decades of the second century. Perhaps Pius I (c. 140-157) or Anicetus (c. 157-168) was the first bishop of Rome, but neither bishop could really have known whether Peter had ever visited Rome a century earlier. It is likely that Pope Anicetus decided where both Peter and Paul were buried in Rome.
Did St. Paul become the bishop of Rome?
Catholic tradition says that Saint Peter went to Rome, perhaps in the 60s of the first century, and became the first bishop of Rome. However, John W. O'Malley, S.J. says in A History of the Popes that no one piece of evidence states in straightforward and unambiguous language either that Peter went to Rome or that he died there.Francis A. Sullivan says, in From Apostles to Bishops, that there is a general agreement among scholars, including Catholic scholars, that the church of Rome was led by a council of presbyters until well into the second century, with no evidence of a ruling bishop before this. The first bishop of Rome was probably either Pius I or Anicetus , in the middle of the second century.
What are facts about the first pope?
A:Saint Peter is traditionally considered to be the first pope;Peter is traditionally said to have gone to Rome to lead the church there, as its first bishop, and was executed on the orders of Emperor Nero after appointing Pope Linus as his successor;We now know that the church of Rome was not led by a succesion of bishops until well into the second century (Francis A. Sullivan SJ, From Apostles to Bishops);The first person known to have been a bishop of Rome was Anicetus (157-168 CE).Although the title 'Pope' was not yet used exclusively for the bishop of Rome, Anicetus could be regarded as likely to have been the first pope.
Which of Jesus apostles became the first bishop of Rome?
Catholic tradition says that the apostle Peter went to Rome to lead the Christians there, and that he was the first pope. There is no actual evidence that Peter ever went to Rome, and Clement of Rome, writing (1 Clement) just thirty years after Peter was supposedly in Rome, appears to have been unaware that Peter had been to Rome. The tradition that Peter was in Rome is believed to have begun during the second century, probably by Anicetus of Rome.If the pope is the bishop of Rome there could not have been a pope until the role was established in the second century. In the view of some, Anicetus might have been the first to hold that position, an his assertion that Peter was his predecessor would have strengthened his authority.For more information, please visit:http://christianity.answers.com/catholicism/a-brief-history-of-the-early-popes
Was the apostle Peter the first bishop of Rome and pope?
A:Probably not. Scholars believe that the role of bishop only emerged in the secnd century, long after Peter dies. Moreover, Clement of Rome, writing around 95 CE (1 Clement), spoke in general terms about the life and death of Peter but appears to have been unaware that Peter had even visited Rome. However, whether true or not, this tradition provides an important link for the Roman Catholic Church back to the early apostles.
How important was Saint Peter to Rome?
Saint Peter, in addition to being the Pope (the earthly leader of the entire Church), was the bishop (the senior pastor) of the Christian Church in Rome.
What evidence is there that Peter chose Linus to be Pope?
A:The first-century history of Christianity in Rome is shrouded in legend. It is important to the Catholic Church, in order to demonstrate primacy over the Orthodox Churches, that Peter was the first bishop of Rome and that he was followed by an unbroken line of popes down to the preset day, but there is no evidence for this. Francis Aloysius Sullivan ('From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church') says that the consensus of scholars is that on the available evidence, the church of Rome was led by a college of presbyters, rather than a single bishop, for at least several decades of the second century. The first bishop of Rome who is firmly attested is Anicetus (157-158 CE).So, not only is there no evidence that Peter was ever in Rome, there is no evidence that Linus was a bishop of Rome. We even find that 'The Apostolic Constitutions' says that Linus was ordained by Paul, with his successor, Clement, ordained by Peter. This tradition is more likely a clumsy attempt to have the papacy originated by both the great apostles.
Who was the first Roman bishop of the Christian Church?
Christian tradition holds that Peter was the first Roman bishop of the Christian Church. However, there is no evidence that Peter ever even visited Rome. Paul writes of meeting Peter in Jerusalem, presumably in the 50s of the first century, when Peter was still one of the pillars of the Jerusalem church. When Paul wrote of Peter, he would already have been rather old and unlikely to begin overseeing the Roman community. Moreover, scholars say that the role of 'bishop' was only instituted in the second century, by which time Peter would have been long dead. Apart from the tradition about Peter, we do not know who the first Roman bishop of the Christian Church was.
Who is the person who like Saint Peter the Bishop of Rome provides leadership to the Catholic Church?
The pope
Does the Bishop of Rome continue Peter's mission?
A:The Catholic Church considers the pope to continue the work and mission of Peter because Christian tradition says that Peter went to Rome and became the first bishop of Rome, appointing Linus as his successor, with subsequent bishops appointed continuously down to the present day. This continuous succession from an appointment made by Peter himself was important to the church of Rome in claiming primacy over all other Christian bishops. However, Francis A. Sullivan SJ (From Apostles to Bishops) says that there is a general agreement among scholars that the church of Rome was led by a council of presbyters until well into the second century, with no evidence of a ruling bishop. It is therefore no longer possible to say that the pope is literally the successor of Saint Peter, nor that he uniquely continues the work of Saint Peter, whether or not he actually visited Rome.
