Can someone help me interpret this passage by Irenaeus? Is he stating that the Church of Rome has Supreme?

Question

Authority?

"It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors to our own times—men who neither knew nor taught anything like these heretics rave about.

"But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles.

"With this church, because of its superior origin, all churches must agree—that is, all the faithful in the whole world—and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition" (Against Heresies 3:3:1–2 [A.D. 189]).

Supreme Authority over all other Churches*

Answer 1

No, he is not. Note here that Iranaeus states the church was founded "by the TWO most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul." This initial description doesn't match what the Roman Catholic Church declares -- that it was founded by Peter, who (though married) was the first Pope. Therefore, Iranaeus is not speaking of the Roman Catholic Church. He's speaking of the TRUE Christian church -- the Body of Christ, which is divided into individual church districts -- one of them being the district of Rome. Iranaeus doesn't imply that Rome has authority over any other district.

If you compare the writings of the EARLIEST church writers, aside from the Gospels and Epistles, you'll see that NO Roman Catholic doctrine is mentioned. For example, these central concepts are completely absent: Mariology; transsubstantiation; a celebate priesthood; etc.

Answer 2

it makes sense since the first Christians were Catholics.
The Church Fathers supported Catholic beliefs.

The Bible tells us that Peter was selected by Jesus.

EDIT: Suzanne - Yet he does declare that Peter is one of the most glorious. And was Paul an original Apostle?
Why are you talking about the EARLIEST church writers but then excluding the Gospels and Epistles? Aren't those good enough?

"Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:1:1 (c. A.D. 180).
This quote makes it clear that he is referencing Peter and Paul's work at building up the early Church, and he is not talking about the original ordination of Peter by Christ, which compliments from the original post where Iraneaus says "founded and organized."

Answer 3

As a protestant, I believe that the cclaim by catholics that Peter was the first bishop of Rome is inaccurate. The evidence doesn't indicate Peter's presence in Rome until the very end of his life. Thus, the supposed line of succession going back to Peter is inaccurate.

And now, the Catholic apologists will attack me....take it away, boys!

Answer 4

Yes, he is saying that because the Roman Catholic Church claims direct succession (a true apostle annointed the first leader, who annointed the next in one unbroken line to today) that they are the holders of all truth and authority. Of course, historically, there is some question about if this is 'true' about the unbroken line, and even more of a question in my mind is then the role of the Holy Spirit. I believe Authority comes from God, via the Holy Spirit and it not simply passed from one man to another.

Answer 5

That is what the Primacy of Rome & the Pope is about.