Skip to content

Course 11 · Lesson 4.1

The bishop of Rome in early history

12 minute read

Lessons in this course

Course 11 outline

Module 1: What the Church Is

  1. Biblical images of the church: body, people, temple and bride
  2. One, holy, catholic and apostolic: the four marks
  3. The mission of the church
  4. The visible and invisible church in Augustine, the Reformers and the East

Module 2: Ministry and Apostolic Succession

  1. Ministry in the New Testament: apostles, elders, overseers and deacons
  2. The bishop in the early church: Clement, Ignatius and Irenaeus
  3. Apostolic succession: three meanings (a line of bishops, the teaching, the mission)
  4. Ordination in the Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions

Module 3: Scripture, Tradition and Church Authority

  1. Scripture and tradition in the early church
  2. The Catholic account: Scripture, tradition and the magisterium
  3. The Orthodox account: the living tradition of the church
  4. The Reformation and the question of sola scriptura

Module 4: Three Systems of Authority

  1. The bishop of Rome in early history
  2. Papal primacy and infallibility in Catholic teaching
  3. Orthodox conciliarity and the role of the patriarchs
  4. Protestant principles of authority: Scripture, confessions and the priesthood of believers
  5. The strongest objections each tradition raises against the others

Module 5: Sacramental Theology

  1. Mystery and sacrament: the words and their history
  2. Augustine and the definition of a sacrament
  3. How many sacraments? Seven, two, or none
  4. Validity, efficacy and the role of faith

Module 6: Baptism and the Eucharist

  1. Baptism in Scripture and the early church
  2. Infant baptism and believers baptism
  3. The Eucharist in the early church
  4. Real presence: transubstantiation, the Orthodox mystery, Lutheran, Reformed and memorial views

Module 7: Reconciliation and Liturgical Worship

  1. The forgiveness of sins in Scripture
  2. Confession and penance in the history of the church
  3. Confession across the traditions: Catholic, Orthodox, Lutheran and Reformed practice
  4. Liturgy, word and table, and the church year
  5. Worship without a fixed liturgy and its principles

Module 8: Schism and Christian Unity

  1. Early schisms: the Donatists and the churches after Chalcedon
  2. East and West: the long division and the events of 1054
  3. The Reformation divisions
  4. Ecumenism and the prospects for unity

All courses

Program / Course 11: Church, Sacraments, and Authority / Lesson 4.1

What you will learn

  • Identify the main early evidence for the standing of the church of Rome and its bishop.
  • Describe key episodes: Clement, Ignatius, Irenaeus, Victor, Stephen, Leo and Chalcedon.
  • Explain what scholars agree on and where interpretation divides.
  • State how Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant readers use the same evidence.

The big idea

From early times the church of Rome held a place of special honor. Its bishop was asked for advice, sometimes intervened in other churches, and was cited by writers such as Irenaeus. Historians agree on much of this evidence and disagree on what it shows. Catholics read it as the early form of a primacy of jurisdiction given to Peter’s successors. Orthodox Christians read it as a primacy of honor within a college of equal bishops. Many Protestants and secular historians see a gradual growth of influence. The episodes need to be read one at a time.

Key terms

Primacy
The first place among the bishops or churches. What the first place includes is the point of dispute.
Primacy of honor
A first place in dignity, without power to govern other churches.
Primacy of jurisdiction
A first place with real authority to decide matters and hear appeals in other churches.
Pentarchy
A scheme from the fifth and sixth centuries by which the church was seen as led by five patriarchates: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem.
Petrine texts
New Testament passages concerning Peter, especially Matthew 16:18-19, Luke 22:32 and John 21:15-17.
Appeal
In church history, the right to bring a case to a higher authority, such as a bishop or council.
Quartodecimans
Christians, chiefly in Asia Minor, who kept Easter on the fourteenth day of the Jewish month, whatever the day of the week.

Background

Rome was the capital of the empire, and the church there was large and well known. Paul wrote his longest letter to it and says its faith is spoken of in all the world (Romans 1:8). Early tradition holds that both Peter and Paul died there under Nero. Most historians accept that Peter was probably in Rome and died there, while the details are uncertain and the claim that he was the first bishop of Rome in the later sense is disputed.

The evidence for the bishop of Rome in the first five centuries is scattered. This lesson reads it in order. The question to keep in view is not whether Rome mattered, which all agree on, but what kind of authority it exercised and what kind of authority the other churches thought it had.

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: The first two centuries

First Clement, written in the name of the Roman church to Corinth around AD 96, intervenes in a dispute in another church. Catholics see it as an early exercise of Roman concern for all the churches. Others note that the letter is sent in the name of the church and that it argues with Scripture and examples and does not claim command.

Ignatius, in his letter to the Romans, greets the church as the one that presides in the place of the region of the Romans and presides in love. The Greek wording is open to more than one reading. Irenaeus around AD 180 says that all churches must agree with the church of Rome because of its superior origin (Against Heresies 3.3.2). The sentence is a famous one. The Latin text is hard to read and the Greek is lost, so the meaning is debated. Catholic writers read it as pointing to Rome’s teaching authority. Others read it as saying that Rome is a convenient witness because of its connections to Peter and Paul.

Step 2: Disputes and limits

About AD 190, Bishop Victor of Rome tried to excommunicate the churches of Asia Minor that kept Easter on a different date. Irenaeus and others urged him not to, and Victor drew back. Catholics see the episode as showing that the bishop of Rome acted as a leader in the whole church. Others see it as showing that his action was resisted and not accepted as binding.

In the 250s, Bishop Stephen of Rome and Cyprian of Carthage disagreed about whether baptisms by heretics were valid. Stephen held that they were, and Cyprian that they were not. Cyprian wrote that the church is built on Peter and that all the bishops share in one episcopate, but he refused to submit to Stephen on the question. Later practice came to agree with Stephen. Catholic writers cite Stephen’s view as the one that prevailed, and Orthodox and Protestant writers cite Cyprian’s refusal as evidence that Rome was not yet accepted as the final judge.

Step 3: The councils

The early ecumenical councils were called by emperors. Nicaea in 325, in its sixth canon, recognized the customary authority of the bishops of Alexandria and Rome over their regions. The Council of Constantinople in 381 gave the bishop of Constantinople a place of honor second after Rome, because Constantinople was the new Rome. In 451, the Council of Chalcedon, in its twenty-eighth canon, gave Constantinople equal privileges with old Rome, on the ground that both were imperial cities. Leo I, bishop of Rome, rejected the canon.

At Chalcedon, the bishops received Leo’s Tome, a letter on the two natures of Christ, with the reported cry that Peter had spoken through Leo. Catholics cite this as acceptance of Roman teaching authority. Others point out that the council examined the Tome against earlier fathers before accepting it, and that it passed the canon against Leo’s wishes.

Step 4: Rome claims and Rome is tested

From the late fourth century, bishops of Rome such as Damasus, Siricius, Innocent I and Leo I spoke of the Roman see as the apostolic see and the successor of Peter, and gave decisions as to the whole church. Leo spoke of Peter’s continuing presence in his successors. A decree attributed to Pope Gelasius around 494 said that the see of Rome is first by Christ’s word, not by councils. The Formula of Hormisdas in 519 was a statement of faith that eastern bishops were asked to sign, affirming the Roman see as the guardian of orthodoxy.

The East did not always agree. Honorius I, bishop of Rome in the seventh century, was condemned after his death as a supporter of the Monothelite error by the Third Council of Constantinople in 681, and the condemnation was confirmed by the pope of that time. Catholic scholars discuss the meaning of Honorius’ letters, and say he was not defining a doctrine. Orthodox and Protestant writers cite the case in discussions of infallibility.

Step 5: What the evidence supports

Most scholars of all traditions agree on the following. Rome was honored from early times. Its bishops were often asked to settle disputes. By the fifth century its bishops made large claims about Peter’s succession. Eastern churches gave Rome the first place of honor, but did not accept a power to overrule councils or bishops. Whether the later claims are a faithful development of the early evidence or a growth beyond it is the point at issue between the traditions.

  1. What exactly does this source say, and what does it leave out?
  2. Is Rome acting as a judge, an adviser, or a witness?
  3. How did the other churches respond?
  4. Is the claim stated by Rome, by another church, or by a council?
  5. Is the text a reliable witness to what it describes, and how is its date known?
  6. Which claims in this lesson would a Catholic, an Orthodox and a Protestant each accept?

Examples

Victor and the Easter date

Around 190 Victor of Rome tried to cut off churches in Asia Minor for keeping Easter on another day. Irenaeus wrote to him urging peace. Victor did not carry out the excommunication. The episode shows both the willingness of Rome to act widely and the willingness of others to resist.

Stephen and Cyprian

Cyprian told the African bishops that no bishop should be a bishop of bishops, and that each bishop would answer to God for his decisions. Yet he also wrote that the unity of the church is rooted in the chair of Peter. The two statements can be read together in different ways, and each tradition quotes him.

Canon 28 of Chalcedon

In 451 the bishops at Chalcedon gave Constantinople rank next after Rome and equal in privileges. Leo objected, and the canon was not accepted in the West for centuries. It shows that the East grounded the rank of a see in the importance of its city, while Rome grounded it in Peter.

Different perspectives

Catholic

Catholic teaching holds that Christ gave Peter a primacy, and that the bishop of Rome inherits it. The early evidence is seen as showing the exercise of this ministry in a growing way. Catholic historians agree that development took place and that the full definition came later, but hold that it is faithful to what was given.

Orthodox

Orthodox writers acknowledge Rome’s first place among the patriarchs in the early centuries, as first among equals. They hold that this was a primacy of honor, tied to Rome’s role as the imperial city and to its martyrs Peter and Paul. They deny that the early church recognized a universal jurisdiction or a personal infallibility of the bishop of Rome.

Protestant

Protestants generally hold that the New Testament does not establish a papacy and that the early evidence shows the growth of a human office. Reformers such as Luther and Calvin rejected papal claims. Some modern Protestants, including some Lutherans in dialogue with Catholics, accept that a limited ministry of unity might serve the church.

Scholarly view

Historians such as those on international ecumenical commissions have written agreed accounts that note Rome’s early prestige and growing claims, and they reach different conclusions about its legitimacy. Many agree that the monarchical papacy as it later appeared cannot be read directly from the second century. Many also agree that Rome’s role in the first centuries was significant.

Why it matters

Most Western arguments about the papacy appeal to early history, and so do Orthodox objections to it. Knowing the evidence in order, with its limits, protects a student from reading either the later papacy or its denial back into the second century. It also shows that all traditions are dealing with the same set of facts.

Common misunderstandings

Misunderstanding: The early church had popes just as the church does today.

Correction: The bishop of Rome had great prestige and sometimes intervened, but the early evidence does not show the full structure of the later papacy. Catholics say it shows a seed. Others say it shows a different arrangement.

Misunderstanding: Historians have proved that Peter was never in Rome.

Correction: Most historians accept that Peter was probably in Rome and likely died there. Whether he was the first bishop in the later sense is a separate and disputed question.

Misunderstanding: The East always rejected Roman authority.

Correction: Eastern bishops often appealed to Rome and accepted its judgments at times, for example in the reception of Leo’s Tome. They resisted claims of authority over councils and over their own affairs.

Misunderstanding: The Irenaeus passage on Rome settles the question.

Correction: The text survives in a difficult Latin translation, and its sense is disputed. It is important evidence and does not by itself settle the dispute.

Knowledge check

What did Victor of Rome try to do around AD 190, and what happened?

He tried to excommunicate the churches of Asia Minor over the date of Easter. Irenaeus and other bishops urged him to keep peace, and he did not carry it out. The episode shows Rome’s wide concern and the limits of its authority in practice.

What was the dispute between Stephen and Cyprian?

They disagreed about whether baptism by heretics was valid. Stephen of Rome said it was and Cyprian of Carthage said it was not. Cyprian would not submit to Stephen. Later practice sided with Stephen, and Catholic and Orthodox writers draw different lessons from the episode.

What does canon 28 of Chalcedon show about eastern views of Rome’s rank?

It grants Constantinople rank equal to Rome’s, because both are imperial cities, and shows that eastern bishops tied a see’s rank to its civil importance. Leo rejected it, grounding Rome’s rank on Peter. The difference of reasoning appears in later disputes.

Name one point most scholars of all traditions accept about early Rome.

Rome was honored from early times, its bishops were often consulted, and by the fifth century they made large claims about Peter. Eastern churches gave Rome first place of honor but did not accept a right to overrule councils. These points are widely shared.

Think it through

  1. How might a Catholic and an Orthodox historian read the same event differently?
  2. Why would the capital status of Rome matter to its standing among churches?
  3. What would count as evidence for a primacy of jurisdiction, as opposed to a primacy of honor?
  4. How do you avoid reading later positions back into early texts?

Independent assignment

A timeline with two readings

In your notebook, make a timeline of at least eight events from 96 to 681 (for example 1 Clement, Ignatius, Irenaeus, Victor, Stephen and Cyprian, Nicaea canon 6, Constantinople canon 3, Leo’s Tome, Chalcedon canon 28, Honorius). For each, write one line on what happened and one line each on how a Catholic and an Orthodox reader would interpret it. Add 150 to 250 words on where Protestants would stand. Keep the work in your notebook.

Further study