Linus first Pope?

[Kaily]

Someone told me that Iraeneus said the first bishop of Rome was Linus. Why did he refer to Linus as first Bishop of Rome instead of St. peter?

 

[NotWorthy]

Someone told me that Iraeneus said the first bishop of Rome was Linus. Why did he refer to Linus as first Bishop of Rome instead of St. peter?

Are you sure its not the “first successor to Peter” or “first pope after Peter”?

 

[David_Zampino]

Linus was the first *successor *to Peter.

 

[NotWorthy]

Here’s the words Ireneaus uses in “Against Heresies - book 3, chapter 3, verse 2” - 3. The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate.

 

[Tedster]

New Advent has an article that might shed some light on your question:

newadvent.org/cathen/09272b.htm

All the ancient records of the Roman bishops which have been handed down to us by St. Irenaeus, Julius Africanus, St. Hippolytus, Eusebius, also the Liberian catalogue of 354, place the name of Linus directly after that of the Prince of the Apostles, St. Peter. These records are traced back to a list of the Roman bishops which existed in the time of Pope Eleutherus (about 174-189), when Irenaeus wrote his book “Adversus haereses”. As opposed to this testimony, we cannot accept as more reliable Tertullian’s assertion, which unquestionably places St. Clement (De praescriptione, xxii) after the Apostle Peter, as was also done later by other Latin scholars (Jerome, Illustrious Men 15). The Roman list in Irenaeus has undoubtedly greater claims to historical authority. This author claims that Pope Linus is the Linus mentioned by St. Paul in his 2 Timothy 4:21. The passage by Irenaeus (Against Heresies III.3.3) reads:After the Holy Apostles (Peter and Paul) had founded and set the Church in order (in Rome) they gave over the exercise of the episcopal office to Linus. The same Linus is mentioned by St. Paul in his Epistle to Timothy. His successor was Anacletus.
We cannot be positive whether this identification of the pope as being the Linus mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:21 goes back to an ancient and reliable source, or originated later on account of the similarity of the name.

According to this article, St. Irenaeus lists Linus as the second Pope.So either your friend was wrong or was misunderstood.

 

[Kaily]

This person said Irenaeus never said Peter was a bishop only that he and paul founded the church.

 

[promethius]

This person said Irenaeus never said Peter was a bishop only that he and paul founded the church.

It’s totally irrelevant anyway. So your friend is saying that Linus was the first pope and led the church astray within ONE generation of Christ.

Okay, so what your friend is saying is that when Christ said He was sending out the Holy Spirit to guide the church and that the gates of hell would never prevail against the church, that Christ was a liar… that within ONE generation, the papacy would be established and, according to your friend, the church would fall away.

There’s one problem with that: if it’s true, then Christ lied, ergo we must assume that God is fully capable of lying, and therefore the scriptures and sacred traditions could all be a lie as well. In other words, God isn’t who He says He is and therefore shouldn’t be worshipped. Either Peter was the first pope, Linus his rightful successor, and the church IS the true church of God (this is truth) or your friend is correct, Linus derailed the church, Jesus lied, and there is no Christian God.

I don’t think i like your friend very much

 

[NotWorthy]

This person said Irenaeus never said Peter was a bishop only that he and paul founded the church.

Its irrelevant. Ireneaus said that they appointed Linus. Is your friend saying that they incorrectly made Linus Bishop? That can’t be, because bishops are in the Bible.

 

[YADA]

This person said Irenaeus never said Peter was a bishop only that he and paul founded the church.

Really, read what Iranaeus is writing about …what is the topic? The topic is the succession of the Bishops of Rome … “They” handed it to Linus … Linus could not be the “First” then … he succeeded someone … and then was succeeded … and after that one was one who was one who was third from …

Peter [First], Linus [1st from], Anacletus [2nd from], Clement [3rd from] … it is not hard to figure out

Not one early Father claims the first Bishop was Paul …

The Church is never identified as unified by the Chair of Paul … no it is inified by the Chair of Peter … the Barque of Peter …

 

[NHInsider]

Someone told me that Iraeneus said the first bishop of Rome was Linus. Why did he refer to Linus as first Bishop of Rome instead of St. peter?

Because Peter was an apostle, which is a higher title. The bishops are successors to the apostles. (This does nothing to address the Linus/Clement issue. . . .)

 

[promethius]

Because Peter was an apostle, which is a higher title. The bishops are successors to the apostles. (This does nothing to address the Linus/Clement issue. . . .)

Correction: by apostolic succession the bishops ARE apostles. It is that apostolic appointment which gives the pope his magisterial authority

 

[NHInsider]

Correction: by apostolic succession the bishops ARE apostles. It is that apostolic appointment which gives the pope his magisterial authority

I’m not challenging the authority of the pope, only explaining why Ireneus made the statement in question, which was the original query. I submit that a first-or-second century Christian would not have referred to an Apostle (defined as an “eyewitness” -one of the Twelve or, in the case of the replacement for Judas, “one of those who had been with Jesus from the beginning” or, in the case of Paul, who had been confronted with Jesus “out of time”) as a “bishop.”

In addition I would submit that, given the above definition of “Apostle,” the bishops are not apostles but are the successors to the apostles and wield apostolic authority.

The Catholic Encyclopedia would seem to support this suggestion:

The bishops have, therefore, a general power of order, jurisdiction, and magisterium, but not the personal prerogatives of the Apostles.