What is the significance to Rome?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ajpirc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

ajpirc

Guest
Is there a significance for why the Pope’s diocese is Rome? I know that is where Peter established it, but he also established other dioceses, so why Rome?
 
I’m not 100% knowledgeable about Catholicism but I think it’s because the Vatican is in Rome. Why the Vatican is specifically in Rome is a question that I would like to know. The Pope is in charge of all Roman Catholic Churches and he is also the bishop of the Roman diocese.

Not sure if I’m correct on that. Please correct me if I’m wrong
 
ajpirc said:
Is there a significance for why the Pope’s diocese is Rome? I know that is where Peter established it, but he also established other dioceses, so why Rome?
Click to expand...
Its St. Peter’s last diocese. Also at the time it was the center of the known world, the capital of the Roman Empire. One of the Church Fathers also wrote (I forgot who) that Rome is sanctified by the blood of St.Peter and St.Paul, both of whom were martyred there.
 
blanc10 said:
I’m not 100% knowledgeable about Catholicism but I think it’s because the Vatican is in Rome. Why the Vatican is specifically in Rome is a question that I would like to know. The Pope is in charge of all Roman Catholic Churches and he is also the bishop of the Roman diocese.

Not sure if I’m correct on that. Please correct me if I’m wrong
Click to expand...
Well, technically the Pope is in charge of all Catholic Churches. Although he’d have more control and command over Roman Catholic churches but not because he’s the Pope, but because he’s also the Patriarch of the Roman Catholic Church.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Well, technically the Pope is in charge of all Catholic Churches. Although he’d have more control and command over Roman Catholic churches but not because he’s the Pope, but because he’s also the Patriarch of the Roman Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Oh, Okay. Thanks! I learn something new everyday!👍
 
Isn’t Rome the center of the world geographically? Why did St. Catherine of Siena persuade the Pope to move back to Rome? Is it necessary for a pope to be the Bishop of Rome or is it just a tradition?
 
Rome was the center of the empire and the entire civilization at that time. As they say all roads lead to Rome.
 
Throughout the Old Testament, God was always defeating the gods of the other nations.
  • Egyptians had a frog godess of fertility and God sent frogs as a plague through Moses. Interestingly enough, the Bible says the frogs were in the Egyptians bed chambers and beds. (get it? goddess of fertility? beds? God has a sense of humor) The Egyptians also had a fly god and God sent a plague of flies.
  • Israel made a golden calf and worshipped it at Mt. Sinai and 3000 werre killed that day by the house of Levi who alone remained faithful.
  • When the Philistines captured the Ark of the Covenant and placed it in their temple, the Phillistine God was found the next day, face down in front of the Ark with it’s hands and head broken off.
  • Etc.
All through the Old Testament, God takes on the false gods of other nations and defeats them. The Roman emperor was a living god-man to whom his subjects had to swear an oath of allegiance which was broken only under penatly of death. A Roman citizen could become a god - they would simply declare him so and erect a statue to him in the middle of the Tiber river. There he is, an instant god.

I think Rome was just next in line, that’s all. Makes me wonder who’s next?

-Tim-
 
ajpirc said:
Isn’t Rome the center of the world geographically? Why did St. Catherine of Siena persuade the Pope to move back to Rome? Is it necessary for a pope to be the Bishop of Rome or is it just a tradition?
Click to expand...
Well technically the “Center of the world” world be would be a little under 4000 miles beneath Rome. 😃

Seriously - No city or surface position can really be called the “geographic center” of a sphere.
However, as far as the Roman Empire was concerned, Rome was indeed the “center” of their world. It was the center of commerce, culture, government etc and, as mentioned above, the old adage, “All roads lead to Rome” is not without considerable truth at that time.
Add to this the fact, also noted previously, tha tPeter and Paul were both martyered there, and that at the time of his martyrdom, Peter was the Bishop (the head of the church) in Rome. Thus the person who succeeded to the Roman Bishopric, succeeded Peter and Peter’s office as primate of the universal Church.
It is Tradition yes…Could it be Changed? I suppose. But this is Highly unlikely for a simple reason.
While the Pope is also the Bishop of Rome, he does nto reside in Rome proper. the Vatican is an independant state. To try and move the Vatican would be nearly impossible since it would basically require another state to cede territory for the purpose, and then the question of all the buildings, treasures etc comes up…

I’m sure that is more information than you needed but…sometimes I can’t stop…

Peace
James
 
Joe_Kelley said:
I think he recently dropped that title . I don’t know whether he abolished it, or if he just ceased using it.

Yes, he dropped the title but not the function. The Pope’s authority over the Roman Catholic Church has not changed. It does get complicated explaining it without going to the details of “he has the authority of a Patriarch but he dropped the title.”
Click to expand...
 
I have absolutely no idea, but the large basilica of St. Peter’s is said to have been built over the burial place of St. Peter. It’s not generally accessible to the public, partly because it’s way under the visible structure.

Rome may have achieved a dominance or notoriety even over Jerusalem due to the support of Constantine (who may have simply been superstitious about Christianity).

Rome was apparently snubbed by the council of Nicea, by not even being invited to participate. I heard that Rome found out about the council about 25 years after the council happened and requested a copy of the proceedings, which included the Nicene Creed.

This snub smoldered for centuries, until the church of Rome decided to revise the Nicene Creed – of course, without consulting the Greek churches – by the inclusion of the “filioque” (the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son). I’m not sure precisely what the significance is but it created the schism of the church.

The East has resisted attempts at reconciliation, because the conflict was a bloody one, for sure, with the sacking of Constantinople at one point.

I just heard a show on TV the other day that says there are 31 miles of corridors in the halls of the vatican. That’s a feat, given that it sits on a plot of land that is only 108 acres. There are tremendous and irreplaceable documents there. I think the Vatican is using modern technology to preserve these documents.

There are also many confidential documents there.
 
Crumpy said:
I have absolutely no idea, but the large basilica of St. Peter’s is said to have been built over the burial place of St. Peter. It’s not generally accessible to the public, partly because it’s way under the visible structure.

Rome may have achieved a dominance or notoriety even over Jerusalem due to the support of Constantine (who may have simply been superstitious about Christianity).

Rome was apparently snubbed by the council of Nicea, by not even being invited to participate. I heard that Rome found out about the council about 25 years after the council happened and requested a copy of the proceedings, which included the Nicene Creed.

This snub smoldered for centuries, until the church of Rome decided to revise the Nicene Creed – of course, without consulting the Greek churches – by the inclusion of the “filioque” (the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son). I’m not sure precisely what the significance is but it created the schism of the church.

The East has resisted attempts at reconciliation, because the conflict was a bloody one, for sure, with the sacking of Constantinople at one point.

I just heard a show on TV the other day that says there are 31 miles of corridors in the halls of the vatican. That’s a feat, given that it sits on a plot of land that is only 108 acres. There are tremendous and irreplaceable documents there. I think the Vatican is using modern technology to preserve these documents.

There are also many confidential documents there.
Click to expand...
Some things seem off here. Western Bishops were invited to the Council, not sure if Rome particularly sent one.

The Latin Church didn’t add the Filioque out of spite of the Greeks. They added it because of how “consubstantial” is understood in the Latin context.

The East hasn’t entirely resisted attempts at reconciliation. Otherwise we wouldn’t have Eastern Catholic today. Some Bishops returned to communion with Rome at the expense of communion with their Orthodox brethren.
 
ConstantineTG said:
The East hasn’t entirely resisted attempts at reconciliation. Otherwise we wouldn’t have Eastern Catholic today. Some Bishops returned to communion with Rome at the expense of communion with their Orthodox brethren.
Click to expand...
As a matter of fact at least the Hungarian Eastern Catholics claim, that their ancestors were never part pf the schism: they lived outside of the Bizantine influence The rite and the tradition was established way back in the first millennium, and they kept that.

Also as a matter of fact also they fled not from the Byzantine Patriarch, but from the Muscovite rule.

As for the significance of Rome as city, I believe it is accidental. The necessity was to show that the new religion is for the Gentiles, Jerusalem is no more the center. Rome was the Center of the political world, this is why either Peter and Paul found it extremely important.

It is not unchangeable. Popes will be always, they can reside elsewhere. God is not bound by any geographical place.
 
JRKH said:
While the Pope is also the Bishop of Rome, he does nto reside in Rome proper. the Vatican is an independant state.
Click to expand...
Even though the Pope lives in Vatican City and celebrates most of his Masses at St. Peter’s, his cathedra is in the basilica of St. John Lateran in Rome, representing his authority over the diocese of Rome.
 
ajpirc said:
Even though the Pope lives in Vatican City and celebrates most of his Masses at St. Peter’s, his cathedra is in the basilica of St. John Lateran in Rome, representing his authority over the diocese of Rome.
Click to expand...
👍
 
ajpirc said:
Even though the Pope lives in Vatican City and celebrates most of his Masses at St. Peter’s, his cathedra is in the basilica of St. John Lateran in Rome, representing his authority over the diocese of Rome.
Click to expand...
Although St. John Lateran is in Rome, under the 1929 Lateran Treaty it and its attached buildings enjoy extraterritorial status as a property of the sovereign Vatican City State, similar to the way embassies do.
 
Joe_Kelley said:
I think he recently dropped that title . I don’t know whether he abolished it, or if he just ceased using it.

Yes, it was Patriarch of the West and yes, the title is currently in abeyance. In theory, at least, it could be resuscitated by a successor.
Click to expand...
 
MarkThompson said:
Although St. John Lateran is in Rome, under the 1929 Lateran Treaty it and its attached buildings enjoy extraterritorial status as a property of the sovereign Vatican City State, similar to the way embassies do.
Click to expand...
Yes, that’s true of S Giovanni in Laterano as well as the other Major Basilicas and some additional churches, plus a goodly number of other buildings, including the various Pontifical Universities and Institutes.
 
ajpirc said:
Even though the Pope lives in Vatican City and celebrates most of his Masses at St. Peter’s, his cathedra is in the basilica of St. John Lateran in Rome, representing his authority over the diocese of Rome.
Click to expand...
And while the title and authority does belong to the Pope, he hands it off to another Bishop to actually run the diocese of Rome.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top