Letter from Pope St. Linus? Anyone Know?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Don_Schneider
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Don_Schneider

Guest
When I was in Catholic high school, I was impressed by something a priest taught in religion class. In support of the doctrine of papal primacy, he mentioned that there is an extant letter from one of the early popes, after Peter. I believe it was Linus, the second pope.

There was apparently some squabble in one of the early Christian communities in Asia Minor, perhaps Philadelphia, I’m not certain. The letter from this pope (Linus?) *mandates *a resolution. Although we don’t have a record of a response from the Church community it had been addressed to, the mere fact that the second Bishop of Rome would assert such authority, *especially at a time when St. John the Apostle was still alive *and living in Ephesus, relatively nearby to the community in question, is significant in proving that the Bishop of Rome held universal authority from the earliest days of the Church. Why would Linus have written such an authoritative letter if he hadn’t known that the community would have acknowledged his authority?

Is anyone here familiar with what I am relating, and can you reproduce as English language translation of the letter?

Thanks much.

Don Schneider
 
The Catholic Encyclopedia mentions that there is supposedly a mention in some early document that Pope Linus made some sort of decree about women having to cover their heads in church, but it confirms that this decree is virtually without a doubt apocryphal. The earliest pope for which there’s any reasonable assurance that we have letters from is Clement, the fourth pope. We know virtually nothing about Linus and Cletus/Anacletus. Are you sure you’re not thinking about Clement?
 
Dear Rolltide:

Thanks much. As this was many years ago, it well could have been Pope St. Clement. As I know the part about St. John still being alive is accurate, I just checked the dates of John’s death (99 or 100) and Clement’s papacy (92-99). John did indeed live into it. So it probably was Clement.

Do you know of this letter my religion teacher spoke of?

Thanks much.

Don
 
Dear Todd:

Thank you! Yes, that must be it. Do you agree that this is fairly strong evidence of the Bishop of Rome’s universal authority from such an early date in Church history and while an Apostle was still living? I shall read the entire letter soon.

Thanks again.

Don
 
Don_Schneider said:
Do you know of this letter my religion teacher spoke of?

Thanks much.

Don
Click to expand...
Well, the First Epistle of Clement is generally believed to be authentic. It is one of the four earliest non-Biblical Christian documents that still survives. There is also a Second Epistle of Clement, whose attribution is challenged, but is probably an authentic transcript of a sermon from the second century church. The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church also includes in their wider Biblical canon an epistle traditionally attributed as written by St. Paul to Clement, but it almost certainly was written by someone else.

Here’s a link to 1 Clement:
earlychristianwritings.com/1clement.html
 
“While Clement’s position as a leading presbyter and spokesman of the Christian community at Rome is assured, his letter suggests that the monarchical episcopate had not yet emerged there, and it is therefore impossible to form any precise conception of his constitutional role. He enjoyed, however, such prestige in the early church that he was credited with the authorship of numerous spurious writings. Chief among these were the Second Epistle of Clement, a 2nd-cent. homily by an unknown hand, and the legendary 3rd-cent. Clementine Homilies and Recognitions. He was also believed to have been responsible for the Apostolic Constitutions, a late 4th-cent. collection of ecclesiastical law.” Oxford Dictionary of Popes by J.N.D. Kelly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top