Is it proven that the pope is a direct successor of St. Peter?

Question

Peter's life was mostly in current day Palestine, how come he is said to be the first pope and they are based in Vatican?

Answer 1

I don't believe they were called popes until the 4th century A.D. when Roman emperor Constantine founded the roman catholic church.

Answer 2

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm

St. Peter (32-67)
St. Linus (67-76)
St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
St. Clement I (88-97)
St. Evaristus (97-105)
St. Alexander I (105-115)
St. Sixtus I (115-125) -- also called Xystus I
St. Telesphorus (125-136)
St. Hyginus (136-140)
St. Pius I (140-155)
St. Anicetus (155-166)
St. Soter (166-175)
St. Eleutherius (175-189)
St. Victor I (189-199)
St. Zephyrinus (199-217)
St. Callistus I (217-22)
St. Urban I (222-30)


and so it continues on through today.

as for the vatican in rome.... have you lived int he same house all your life?! my family started out in Poland and now live in the USA.....

Answer 3

Because Christ made Peter the first earthly head of the Church in Matthew 16.

Following Christ's Ascension, most of Peter's life was actually in Rome. True, the Bible doesn't specifically say he was in Rome -- but in Peter's New Testament letters, he gives "greetings from Babylon." Babylon was a "code word" for Rome, where persecution of Christians was heavy and Peter was a wanted man.

Also, many of the earliest Christian writings not found in Scripture clearly tell us that Peter was in Rome, was head of the Church there, and died there.

..

Answer 4

Yes it is. The second Bishop of the Church was Evidous and so on to today.

Answer 5

It is to most Christians in the world.

John 21:15-17 states:

When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs."

He then said to him a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep."

He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, "Do you love me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." (Jesus) said to him, "Feed my sheep.

Matthew 16:17-19 states:

Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Here are a few non-biblical proofs of Peter as Bishop of Rome, all of them from before the council of Nicea in 325 A.D.

Irenaeus in 189 C.E.:
"The very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; ... The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate." (Against Heresies 3:3:2-3) http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.iv.html

Tertullian in 200 C.E.:
"For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like manner by Peter." (Demurrer Against the Heretics 32) http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0311.htm

Anonymous in 211 C.E.:
"For they say that all the early teachers and the apostles received and taught what they now declare, and that the truth of the Gospel was preserved until the times of Victor, who was the thirteenth bishop of Rome from Peter" (The Little Labyrinth, in Eusebius, Church History 5:28:3) http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.x.xxix.html

Cyprian of Carthage in 251 C.E.:
"And although to all the apostles, after His resurrection, He gives an equal power, and says, “As the Father hath sent me, ..., they shall be retained;” (John 20:21-22) yet, He founded a single Chair. That He might set forth unity, He established by His authority the origin of that unity, as having its origin in one man alone. No doubt the others were all that Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, and it is thus made clear that there is but one Church and one Chair. So too, even if they are all shepherds, we are shown but one flock which is to be fed by all the apostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he confidence that he is in the Church?" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4) http://www.romancatholicism.org/jansenism/cyprian-church.htm

And in 252 C.E.:
"Moreover, Cornelius was made bishop by the judgment of God and of His Christ, by the testimony of almost all the clergy, by the suffrage of the people who were then present, and by the assembly of ancient priests and good men, when no one had been made so before him, when the place of Fabian, that is, when the place of Peter24612461 [On the death of Fabian, see Ep. iii. p. 281; sufferings of Cornelius (inference), p. 303; Decius, p. 299.] and the degree of the sacerdotal throne was vacant; which being occupied by the will of God, and established by the consent of all of us, whosoever now wishes to become a bishop, must needs be made from without; and he cannot have the ordination of the Church who does not hold the unity of the Church." (Letters 51:8) http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.li.html

Eusebius of Caesarea in 312 C.E.:
"As to the rest of his followers, Paul testifies that Crescens was sent to Gaul; but Linus, whom he mentions in the Second Epistle to Timothyas his companion at Rome, was Peter’s successor in the episcopate of the church there, as has already been shown. Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome, was, as Paul testifies, his co-laborer and fellow-soldier." (Church History 3:4:9–10). http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.viii.iv.html

More other early Christian writings that refer to Peter as Bishop of Rome, see: http://www.americancatholictruthsociety.com/docs/ecfpapacy.htm

The Catholic Church believes the Lord made Simon alone, whom he named Peter, the "rock" of his Church. He gave him the keys of his Church and instituted him shepherd of the whole flock.

The Pope is the senior pastor of 1.1 billion Catholics, the direct successor of Simon Peter.

The Pope’s main roles include teaching, sanctifying, and governing.

For more information, see the Catechism of the Catholic Church, section 880-882: http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt3art9p4.htm#880

With love in Christ.

Answer 6

Yes dear, it's a job that's transmitted from father to first born son I hear....

Answer 7

In Catholic tradition, the foundation for the office of the pope is indeed found primarily in Matthew 16:13-20. Here, Jesus asked the question, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" The Apostles responded, "Some say John the Baptizer, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." Our Lord then turned to them and point-blank asked them, "And you, who do you say that I am?"

St. Peter, still officially known as Simon, replied, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God." Our Lord recognized that this answer was grace-motivated: "No mere man has revealed this to you, but My heavenly Father."

Because of this response, our Lord said to St. Peter, "You are 'Rock,' and on this rock I will build My Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." The name change itself from Simon to Peter indicates the Apostle being called to a special role of leadership; recall how Abram's name was changed to Abraham, or Jacob's to Israel, or Saul's to Paul, when each of them was called to assume a special role of leadership among God's people.

The word "rock" also has special significance. On one hand, to be called "rock" was a Semitic expression designating the solid foundation upon which a community would be built. For instance, Abraham was considered "rock" because he was the father of the Jewish people (and we refer to him as our father in faith) and the one with whom the covenant was first made.

On the other hand, no one except God was called specifically "rock," nor was it ever used as a proper name except for God. To give the name "rock" to St. Peter indicates that our Lord entrusted to him a special authority. Some antipapal parties try to play linguistic games with the original Greek Gospel text, where the masculine-gender word "petros," meaning a small, moveable rock, refers to St. Peter while the feminine-gender word "petra," meaning a massive, immoveable rock, refers to the foundation of the Church. However, in the original Aramaic language, which is what Jesus spoke and which is believed to be the original language of St. Matthew's Gospel, the word "Kepha," meaning rock, would be used in both places without gender distinction or difference in meaning. The gender problem arises when translating from Aramaic to Greek and using the proper form to modify the masculine word "Peter" or feminine word "Church."

"The gates of hell" is also an interesting Semitic expression. The heaviest forces were positioned at gates; so this expression captures the greatest warmaking power of a nation. Here this expression refers to the powers opposed to what our Lord is establishing-the Church. (A similar expression is used in reference to our Lord in Acts 2:24: "God freed Him from the bitter pangs of hell, however, and raised Him up again, for it was impossible that death should keep its hold on Him.") Jesus associated St. Peter and his office so closely with Himself that He became a visible force protecting the Church and keeping back the power of hell.

Second, Jesus says, "I will entrust to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven." In the Old Testament, the "number two" person in the Kingdom literally held the keys. In Isaiah 22: 19-22 we find a reference to Eliakim, the master of the palace of King Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:17ff) and keeper of the keys. As a sign of his position, the one who held the keys represented the king, acted with his authority and had to act in accord with the king's mind. Therefore, St. Peter and each of his successors represent our Lord on this earth as His Vicar and lead the faithful flock of the Church to the Kingdom of Heaven.

Finally, Jesus says, "Whatever you declare bound on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever you declare loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven." This is rabbinic terminology. A rabbi could bind, declaring an act forbidden or excommunicating a person for serious sin; or a rabbi could loose, declaring an act permissible or reconciling an excommunicated sinner to the community.

Here, Christ entrusted a special authority to St. Peter to preserve, interpret and teach His truth. In all, this understanding of Matthew 16 was unchallenged until the Protestant leaders wanted to legitimize their rejection of papal authority and the office of the pope. Even the Orthodox Churches recognize the pope as the successor of St. Peter; however, they do not honor his binding jurisdiction over the whole Church but grant him a position of "first among equals."

St. Peter's role in the New Testament further substantiates the Catholic belief concerning the papacy and what Jesus said in Matthew 16. St. Peter held a preeminent position among the Apostles. He is always listed first (Mt. 10:14; Mk. 3:16-19; Lk. 6:14-1 5; Acts 1:13) and is sometimes the only one mentioned (Lk. 9:32). He speaks for the Apostles (Mt. 18:21; Mk. 8:28; Lk. 12:41; Jn. 6:69).

When our Lord selects a group of three for some special event, such as the Transfiguration, St. Peter is in the first position. Our Lord chose to teach from St. Peter's boat. At Pentecost St. Peter preached to the crowds and told of the mission of the Church (Acts 2;14-40). He performed the first miraculous healing (Acts 3:6-7). SL Peter also received the revelation that the Gentiles were to be baptized (Acts 10:9-48) and sided with St. Paul against the need for circumcision (Acts 15). At the end of his life, St. Peter was crucified, but in his humility asked to be crucified upside down.

As Catholics, we believe that the authority given to St. Peter did not end with his life but was handed on to his successors. The earliest writings attest to this belief. St. Irenaeus in his Adversus Haereses described how the Church at Rome was founded by St. Peter and St. Paul and traced the handing on of the office of St. Peter through Linus, Cletus (also called Anacletus), and so on, through 12 successors to his own present day, Pope Eleutherius. Tertullian in De Praescriptione Haereticorum asserted the same point as did Origen in his Commentaries on John, St. Cyprian of Carthage in his The Unity of the Catholic Church and many others.

Granted, the expression of papal authority becomes magnified after the legalization of Christianity and especially after the fall of the Roman Empire and the ensuing political chaos. Nevertheless, our Church boasts of an unbroken line of legitimate successors of St. Peter who stand in the stead of Christ We must always remember that one of the official titles of the pope, first taken by Pope Gregory the Great is "Servant of the Servants of God."

Answer 8

The following is an account of the history of St. Peter from the earliest mention of him in the Acts of the Apostles.


About 34AD ( Acts 2:41), we have an early mention of Peter. Some days later, in Acts 5:19, Peter is freed from prison by an angel. He spends four years in Jerusalem (Acts 8:25). St. Paul arrived at the beginning of Peter's fourth year (Acts 9:27-28). In the same year Peter (Acts 9:32) went to Joppe, raised Tabitha, and had the linen vision (Acts 10:11-12). After a few days he went to Caesarea (to visit Cornelius - Acts 10:23). He returned to Jerusalem (Acts 11:18) for a short time. Then he went to Antioch in Syria (as did Barnabas). This is attested to by Anacletus (Ep. iii), Marcellus (Ep. iii), St. Innocent I (Ep. xiv), St. Damasus in the Pontifical Book, St. Jerome in the "De Viris Illustribus" etc.


Peter's episcopacy in Antioch lasted seven years (St. Leo, Sermon on Sts. Peter and Paul). Eleven years after the Ascension (the second year of Claudius), Peter went to Rome, first visiting Jerusalem (Acts 12, where he is thrown in prison, then rescued by an angel). The Roman Martyrology records the converts he sent to various parts, e.g. to Sicliy he sent Pancras, Marcian, and Berillus; to Verona he sent Exuperius, etc.


In the seventh year of his Roman pontificate, Claudius expelled all the Jews (and the Christians, who were regarded as a Jewish sect) from Rome. St. Peter returned to Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas came for him over the dispute at Antioch (Acts 15:8). This Council took place in the 10th year of Claudius.


(Paul was converted the year after the Ascension, and went to see Peter in Jerualem in the third year of his conversion (Gal. 1:18); fourteen years later he went again to Jerusalem (Gal 2:1) and attended the Council (Acts 15). So there were eighteen years from the Crucifixion to the Council of Jerusalem, which would be the tenth year of Claudius' reign.)


Claudius died after a reign of thirteen years, and his four-year edict of expulsion against the Jews died with him. It was during this four-year spell that Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans. Nero succeeded, and Christians began returning to Rome (including Aquila and Priscilla). Peter returned to Rome in the first year of Nero's reign. Two years later Paul joined Peter in Rome as a prisoner. (So how come Paul found the Jews in Rome knew the Christian religiononly by report, if Peter had been there? The solution is that the Jews who had been banished did not return.)


Two years later (fourth year of Nero's reign), Paul, now set free, spent some time in Rome, then left for Spain.


In the tenth year of Nero (22nd year of Peter's pontificate, 64 AD), Rome was set on fire. Nero blamed the Chrisatians and began a persecution against them the following year.





In the twelfth year of Nero (68AD), Peter, who had been absent for a while, came back to Rome to revive the Church. In this year Peter wrote his second Epistle, in which he foretells his own death (1:14). Nero cast Peter and Paul into the Mamertine prison for nine months. From here Paul wrote his Second Letter to Timothy, requesting he come to Rome to witness his (Paul's) martyrdom. It was at this tme that Process and Martinian were converted, alomg with 47 others.
In ~68-69AD, in the 25th year of Peter's pontificate in Rome, Peter and Paul were sentenced to death.


This simple sketch should explain any difficulties which arise, e.g., how Peter could have been seven years at Antioch and twenty-five years Bishop of Rome, and yet be in Jerusalem in the 4th, 11th and 18th year after Our Lord's Ascension, as inferred from the Epistle to the Galatians and the Acts of the Apostles.





That St. Peter was Bishop of Rome is testified by:

Eusebius, Chronicon, 74
St. Irenaeus, Book III, chapter 3.
Dorotheus, In Synopsis.
St. Augustine, Epistola 53 and Contra Epistolam Fundamenti, ch. 4, title 8; in chapter 5 he writes: "I am kept in the church by the succession of Bishops from St. Peter, to whom the Lord committed the care of His sheep down to the present Bishop."



That St. Peter died in Rome is testifed by:

St. Augustine, de Consense Evangelistarum, Book 1.
Eusebius, Chronicon 71, a Christo nato.
Paul Orosius, History, Book VIII.
St. Maximus, Sermon v on the Birthday of the Apostles.
Origen, Book III on Genesis, as stated by eusebius, HIstory, Book III, ch. 2.
St. Jerome, Book of Illustrious Men.
Calvin: "I cannot withstand the consent of those writers who prove that Peter died at Rome." Institutes, Book IV.



If Peter was not in Rome, please explain:


who was the bishop of Rome?
why universal evidence to show Peter was in fact, in Rome?
where did Peter go for 25 years?
where did he die?
how did his bones get to Rome?
why has no other See claimed supremacy?
why did no ancient writers claim the contrary?

The reference to Babylon at the end of 1 Peter is universally understood to refer to Rome. Not only is there no evidence of any kind that Peter was in the real Babylon, but Eusebius in Book II, ch. 15, and Jerome, in his "Book of Illustrious Men", both record that Peter called Rome by the name Babylon?.

Answer 9

no concrete proof