Who was really the first pope?

Answer 1

Another answer from our community:

It would depend on who is to be trusted as a source. Technically, no one could verify who the pope is/was but the Church, and the Church couldn't do that unless it had a hierarchy, and the head of the hierarchy, and therefore of the Church, is the pope, which means the pope would have to verify himself.

The first pope, as verified in The Bible, is St. Peter. Peter literally translated means "rock", and Christ promises to build his church upon this rock. But note that Christ says "will build" and "will give the keys to heaven". It is a promise that is not yet fulfilled. Protestants assert Christ was here speaking metaphorically, or pointing to either Himself or even an actual rock, however, Christ's changing of Simon's name makes no sense if it is not in conjunction with the office Christ wishes to bestow.

Ironically though, the scriptures need to be verified themselves as true before they can be used as proof of anything. The only institution that can define what is Divinely inspired has to be divinely inspired itself, and only an organization begun by God could have such an ability. Anything that is organized has a hierarchy. Thus, it is the Church, under the guidance of the pope that declares the scriptures to be accepted as divine truth, for only the pope may speak ex cathedra, that is, infallibly, invoking Christ's authority and the powers intrinsic to that authority. Thus, with scripture needing verification from the Church, it is Church tradition which tells us who the first pope is, and the early Church fathers almost unanimously

tell us Peter came before all others. These are independent documents written by experts in the early Christian Church.

Once again, it depends on what is acceptable as a trusted source, but the arguments briefly outlined above have been sufficient for most.

Another Answer

The Church receives Peter, one of the apostles of Jesus Christ, as the first pope. His papal authority was promised by Christ during His ministry (Matthew 16) and activated after His resurrection (John 21) making Peter's papacy to begin around 30(?) A.D. The early Church received Peter in this position as seen in the writings and testaments of the Church fathers.

Answer 2

Catholics believe that the first pope of the Catholic Church was St. Peter.

Catholic Answer Peter was appointed as the first Pope about the year A.D. 33 by Our Blessed Lord, Himself (read St. Matthew's Gospel 16:17-19). Although, it is important to note that the Italian "Papa" from which we get "Pope" wasn't used at first, the first bishop of Rome to be contemporaneously referred to as "pope" (pappas, or pappas) is Damasus I (366-84) (Baumgartner, 2003, p. 6). From there we know that our first Holy Father, or Vicar of Christ (his title is based on the chief steward of the Jewish Kingdom (see Isaiah 22:15-25) on which Christ modeled his Vicar by giving him the "keys of the Kingdom" (St. Matthew 16:19). From There St. Peter went to Rome, we know this from his own testimony in his first letter where he tells us that he is writing from "Babylon" which was the Christian code word for Rome at that time. Subsequently he and St. Paul were both martyred there and St. Peter was buried on Vatican Hill, his tomb has been excavated beneath the high altar of St. Peter's, you may view the evidence at the link below. In the Liber Pontificalis which is a list of all the Popes from the very beginning, it lists St. Peter as ruling the Church from 32 A.D. until his martyrdom in A.D. 67. We know that St. Peter was martyred in Rome and buried beneath the high altar of St. Peter's as the graffiti on the wall around the tomb, which indicates St. Peter was buried there, was written by those who were present and gave him their allegiance as Bishop of Rome. Plus their children and grandchildren, carrying on the tradition, right down to the present day. So, St. Peter was the first pope, and was buried in his tomb, which you can go to see at the present time. His tomb has been venerated all throughout history, even during the terrible persecutions of the first two centuries. People gave their lives to transmit this information on the Pope on which Our Blessed Lord, Jesus Christ, founded His Church, and we must respect those who gave the ultimate sacrifice to give this knowledge to future generations, and on to us. Thus we have, from the Liber Pontificalis the following list of popes, and their dates:

1. St. Peter (32-67)

2. St. Linus (67-76)

3. St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)

4. St. Clement I (88-97)

5. St. Evaristus (97-105)

6. St. Alexander I (105-115)

7. St. Sixtus I (115-125) Also called Xystus I

from The Essential Catholic Survival Guide Answers to Tough Questions About the Faith by the Staff of Catholic Answers; Nihil Obstat: Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004, Imprimatur: +Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004, © 2005 by Catholic Answers, Inc. San Diego, CA

Early Christian Testimony

William A. Jurgens, in his three volume set The Faith of the Early Fathers, a masterly compendium that cites at length everything from the Didache to John Damascene, includes thirty references to this question, divided, in the index, about evenly between the statements that "Peter came to Rome and died there" and that "Peter established his See at Rome and made the Bishop of Rome his successor in the primacy." A few examples must suffice, but they and other early references demonstrate that there can be no question that the universal-and very early-position (one hesitates to use the word tradition, since some people read that as "legend") was that Peter certain did end up in the capital of Rome.

Tertullian, in The Demurrer against the Heretics (A.D. 200), noted of Rome, "How happy is that church . . . where Peter endured a passion like that of the Lord, where Paul was crowned in a death like John's [referring to John the Baptist, both he and Paul being beheaded]." Fundamentalists admit that Paul died in Rome, so the implication from Tertullian is that Peter also must have been there. It was commonly accepted, from the very first, that both Peter and Paul were martyred at Rome, probably in the Neronian persecution of the 60s.

In the same book, Tertullian wrote that "this is the way in which the apostolic churches transmit their lists: like the church of the Smyrneans, which records that Polycarp was placed there by John; like the church of the Romans, where Clement was ordained by Peter." This Clement, know as Clement of Rome later would be the fourth pope. Clement wrote his Letter to the Corinthians perhaps before the year 70, just a few years after Peter and Paul were killed, in it he made reference to Peter ending his life where Paul ended his.

In his Letter to the Romans (A.D. 110), Ignatius of Antioch remarked that he could not command the Roman Christians the way Peter and Paul once did, such a comment making sense only if Peter had been a leader, if not the leader, of the church in Rome.

Irenaeus, in Against Heresies (A.D. 190) said that Matthew wrote his Gospel, "while Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church." A few lines later he notes that Linus was named as Peter's successor, that is, the second pope, and that next in line were Anacletus (also know as Cletus), and then Clement of Rome.

Answer 3

The apostle Peter may well have been the first leader of the Christian Church, but this does not make him the first Roman Catholic pope unless he became the leader of the church in Rome.

A second-century tradition says Peter went to Rome and became the first bishop of Rome before being executed there. The Catholic Church goes to extraordinary lengths to attempt to prove that Saint Peter really was the first bishop of Rome and therefore first pope, even claiming to have found the actual remains of Saint Peter under the church named Saint Peter's Basilica. Contrary evidence is at least as abundant as evidence that Peter ever went to Rome, including the letter known as 1 Clement. Writing from Rome just a few decades after Peter was supposedly the first pope, the author speaks in general terms about the suffering and death of Peter, but seems unaware that he was ever in Rome: "There was Peter who by reason of unrighteous jealousy endured not one not one but many labours, and thus having borne his testimony went to his appointed place of glory." At best, Peter can not be verified as the first pope.

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 accept any Roman bishop traditionally attributed to the first century, although it is possible that some were real people even if only presbyters.

The first person known with certainty to have been bishop of Rome is Anicetus (157-168), although it is reasonably possible that his predecessor, Pius I (c. 142-155), was a monepiscopal bishop. At this stage, the bishop of Rome was not yet uniquely referred to as the Pope.

Answer 4

Catholic tradition says that Peter was the first pope, but to ask who was really the first pope is to ask for more than just tradition. If it is even possible that Peter was the first pope in Rome, we can expect evidence in the form of a series of successors who replaced Peter. After all, it is improbable in the extreme that if Peter set an apostolic precedent as bishop of Rome, the Christians of Rome would not appoint a replacement, maintaining an unbroken line of popes down to the present day.

According to Francis A. Sullivan SJ (From Apostles to Bishops) there was no unbroken line of popes through the first century and well into the second century. He says that most scholars are of the opinion that, in spite of Church tradition, the church of Rome was led by a group of presbyters, and that bishops were not appointed to the church in Rome until later in the second century. The first person known to have been bishop of Rome is Anicetus (157-168), although it is quite possible that his predecessor in tradition, Pius I, was also bishop of Rome.