How papacy began in Catholic Church

true
By Dr. Emmanuel Mutyaba

The term Pope comes from a Greek word pappas meaning father. Today, the Pope  is known as the Bishop of Rome hence the successor of St Peter the apostle, the Vicar of Christ.

How did this idea begin?

The papacy as it is conceived today did not exist until around 340AD. Before that,  the term pope was applied to all bishops who headed churches in the major Christian regions that is Rome, Jerusalem, Antioch, lexandria and Constantinople and others. Bishops were recognised as the successors of the twelve apostles and Paul.

The word apostle (a.posto,louj/ ap-os'-tol-os) as used in the 1 Corinthians 12:28-30 means
a delegate, messenger, one sent forth with orders; it is specifically applied to the twelve apostles of Christ and in a broader sense applied to other eminent Christian teachers such as Barnabas, Timothy and Silvanus.     

The twelve formed a specific group, “created” by Jesus (not self-constituted) after a night of prayer from amongst his disciples (Luke 6,13). Mark 3,14 speaks of “to constitute” the Twelve, and John 15, 16 re-iterates that this is Jesus’ choice. The Twelve are in the first place the representatives of the New Israel, called to judge the twelve tribes (Matthew 19, 28; Luke 18, 30).

They also receive other missions like: to preach Mk 3,14; 6,12, to celebrate the Eucharist Lk 22,19; 22,4; in 23,14 called Apostles, to testify to Christ Lk 24,48; in Acts 1,8 refers to the Apostles, to teach and preside Acts 2,42-43, to preside over distribution of goods Acts 4,34-37, to receive the gifts from the community Acts 5,2, to convoke the community Acts 6,2, to impose hands on the deacons Acts 6,6, to commission people Acts 8,14/25: the commissioning of Peter and John. This commissions was an apostolic responsibility/authority (Acts 6: 2-6) for the universal Church, with an emphasis on testimony (teaching / “magisterium”). They were exercising supreme authority wherever they were (Acts 6).
        
While the Christians inherited the mission of the 72 disciples of Christ, the bishops are the successors of the twelve apostles (find this in Lumen Gentio, 20, 21 and 24 and ICI, 1944 chapter II) continuing with their mission entrusted to them by Christ. Whenever an apostle died, the Christian of his church appointed his successor who became a bishop of that church.
       
The word bishop (e.pisco,poij/ episkopos or ep-is'-kop-os) was used in Philippians. 1,1 to signify an overseer, a man charged with the duty of seeing that things to be done by others are done rightly, any curator, guardian, the superintendent, or overseer of a Christian church. Some people such as St Augustine (4th century AD), argue that Petr is a symbol of all Christian  so each Christian is a hair of the twelve apostles of Jesus. But the New Testament clearly describes a “structuring” around Jesus, such as the disciples, the seventy (or seventy-two) with a specific mission, distinct from that of the twelve apostles. There is also evidence of a communal life of the twelve apostle but not of the 72 disciples; Peter expressed it when he said to Jesus that, “we have left everything and followed you” (Matthew 19,27).

Apostolic succession

This concept was founded for the first time around 180AD, in Irenaeus of Lyons who offers a list of the apostolic succession  8-12 [Ephesus]). For each apostle who died, the church he led chose his successor.
    
Clement of Rome  describes the designation of eminent persons with a supra-local authority, an authority referred to as episcopate (Letter to the Corinthians, 44). Around 150 a fusion is made between “eminent persons” and “local bishops”, who are vested with apostolic authority, and become the unique bearers of such authority in the community.
          
So the bishops who are in this line of succession (LumenGentio 24), are unique bearers of apostolic and local authority 1 Tim 3,1-7). Each bishop has an apostolic authority in his territory (Diocese) (Lumen Gentio 22) but exercised in communion with other bishops each in his respective territory and that is what is referred to as Episcopal collegiality (each bishop is a colleague of the other, Lumen Gentio 22-23).
           
How one became a bishop
    
The population of the local Church designated the one they wanted to be their bishop, following the process described in Acts 6,5 and Clement of Rome (Letter to the Corinthians 44,3). The process of designation was the outcome of a desire to obtain the best qualified individual. The clergy gave testimony (testimonium); the people gave their approval (suffragium) and the bishops (who had to give the consecration) gave consent (consensus or iudicium).
        
Since they were the bishops who consecrated a new bishop, they had more powers and over time their influence over the process grew stronger, excluding the role of the lay people.         
           
The functions of the bishop (after 150)
       
The bishop was considered the “spouse” of his church and not transferable, and he alone had authority of government. The bishop was the first minister of the sacraments since true priesthood of Christ subsists in them, sharing in Christ’s munus regendi(office of governing), munus docendi (office of teaching) and the munus sacrificendi (office of sactifying0: the Eucharist was celebrated around the bishop, and it was he who conferred baptism during the night of Easter and administered public penance.

The bishop was also the administrator of the temporal goods of the Church (which grew significantly in the third century), and the judge of the tribunals that the Church created for civil cases. The symbol of his office was the cathedra, or chair, which expressed magisterial and juridical authority. This was an imitation of the chair of Moses and of the seat of office of the civil magistrate, as well as a symbol of the apocalyptic throne.
     
After 400 imperial authorities began to collapse in the West, the bishops took on himself responsibility for the civil protection of the population, since he became very often the only figure of authority left. This even included, in the end, preparations for military defence in particular cases. The bishop became princeps populi and rector civitatis. In Rome, where Gregory I the Great (d. 604) governed the city despite the existence of an imperial governor.

The begging of the papacy as we know it today            
      
Since each bishop was supreme in his territory, settling disputes among them became difficult especially with the emergence of heretics (those who hold onto a different teaching than the official church teaching in) there developed divisions among bishops due to the disputed  caused by heretics and so on. This called for a need of a central authority respected by all(Lumen Gentio 25), to handle it  in order to preserve the unity of the church (Read the Dognatic constitution of the church called Pastore Aetemus chapter 4 of Vatican II 1870 and the Apostolos Suos of 1998). 

As a solution, they had to revisit the idea of the collegiality of the apostles where Peter has precedence over all others chosen by Jesus (Lumen Gentio 22). He received a nickname from Jesus, “Peter, which signify “rock, but also “precious stone”.    Matthew 16:17: “Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah…18:And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19:I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."This name Peter constitutes a program;  he became the father (pope) of the faithful, the new Abraham, linked to the “rock” in Isaiah 51:1-2[1] and linked to Genesis 17,5-7 (cf. Gal 3, 6-9.29; Rom 4; Heb 11, 8-19).
        
So it was Jesus himself who made peter head of other; Luke 22:32: “But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers." John 21:15: "Feed my lambs.".16: "Take care of my sheep.".17: "Feed my sheep. Matt 4,18; 16,18; Mark 3,16; Luke 6,14; John 1,42. John 21:15: When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?" "Yes, Lord," he said, "you know that I love you." Jesus said, "Feed my lambs."

Peter after the Resurrection. The Church that, after theological reflection, established in the Gospels and Acts the tradition of its Founder attributes a role of the first importance to Peter. He is the most named individual in the New Testament after Jesus Christ (the Gospel and Acts mention him 195 times, while all the others together receive 130 mentions, of which John alone constitutes 29). The fourth Gospel, dedicated to the “beloved disciple” still presents (not without a touch of polemic) Peter as the most important.
       
Peter's role is unique from other apostles, that is why he is always nominated as the first of the Twelve (Matt 10, 2-4; Mark 3, 16-19; Luke 6, 13-16; Acts 1,13). Note the words of the oldest tradition of 1 Cor 15:5 “and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve.”Peter is the first official witness to the Resurrection[2] and the leader of the community of Jerusalem until his departure in the spring of 41 (Acts 1-12; Gal 1,18ss). One should also note the expression, “Peter and his companions“ (Luke 8,45; 9,32; Acts 2,24; 5,29 –cfr. Mark 1,36). These texts show the importance of Peter’s ministry whilst not concealing his weaknesses.
       
Of special importance are the texts of Paul, written during the life of Peter, that refer to him as Cephas (Gal 1,18; 2,9.11.14; 1 Cor 1,12; 3,22; 9,5; 15,5) or Peter (Gal 2,7-8) but never as Simon. He is therefore already seen as the “rock” of the Church. In addition, the fact that in the New Testament and the other writings of the first and second centuries, Peter is at the centre of controversies also indicates his importance.
        
So among the bishops who are the successors of the twelve apostles, they had to choose one to take the role of Peter, heading the collegiality of bishops, to whom all obey. And the choice went to the bishop of Rome basing on the fact that, Peter to who Christ entrusted his church died and was buried in Rome which rendered the Church of Rome very important. That it has a  special obligation to continue witnessing Peter's role.

This explains why to be a successor of Peter today, you have to be a bishop of Rome and vested with the authority of Peter to lead the entire church of God wherever it may be, heading the college of bishops.

Since Peter was not a Roman, it does not mean that his successors must be Roman, ever since, up today, there has been a series of appointments of bishops of Rome from Various parts of the world including Africa. According to the Liber Pontificalis, three popes: Pope St Victor I (ca186-198), Pope St Miltiades (311-14), and Pope St Gelasius (492-496) were north Africans.

The Liber Pontificalis is composed of a series of biographical entries, which record the dates and important facts for each pope. It is the oldest and most detailed chronicle dating from the Early Church. The Liber Pontificalis is dated from the sixth century. The record of names begins with St Peter. Two documents, around a century after peter's death, contain the names of those who were Peter’s successors. There is the list of Egesippus, written at Rome in 160 and cited by Eusebius “to Anicetus succeeded Soterus, and to Soterus Eleuterius” (Ecclesiastical History, IV, 22, 3).
      
Moreover there is a reported list by (but not composed by) Irenaeus of Lyons around 180, Therefore, after having founded and constructed the Church, the blessed apostles affirmed Linus to the service of the episcopate; Paul mentions this Linus in the letters to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus.

After him, to the third place since the time of the apostles, Clement receives the episcopate, who had seen the apostles themselves…to this Clement Evaristus succeeded, and to Evaristus Alexander; then, to the sixth from the time of the apostles, was established Sistus; after him Telephorus, who gave glorious witness; then Iginus, Pius and after him Anicetus. After Anicetus Soterus succeeded and, now to the twelve place since the time of the apostles, Eleuterius held the episcopal office”. (Against the Heresies, III, 3,3).
     
There is no reason to doubt the accuracy of these lists, since the community of Rome should have had a clear record of their leaders. Nor should it be supposed that this list, “successors in the episcopate”, implies a succession of administrative offices, but rather a witness to the truth, the first and proper ministry of Peter.

From 340 AD on words, Rome became very importunate with supreme judicial powers in the church. Most memorable  in this process is the pontificate of Julian I (337 – 352) who wrote  a letter explaining the correct procedure, namely that Athanasius could not be deposed without prior consultation with Rome. This letter repeatedly invokes apostolic canons against the new forms (linked to the claims of the Christian emperor). (DS 132).

In the same letter Pope Julian writes that “what we have received from St Peter, I make known to you”. Against the (novel) situation of a Christian emperor claiming to act as head of the Church, he makes appeal to the original apostolic authority of the See of Rome to defend Church liberty.
      
In 343, the Synod of Serdica (now Sofia in Bulgaria) declared Rome as the place of appeal in the case of deposition of a bishop (DS 133-136). The text is interesting for expressions such as “we honour the memory of the apostle Peter” and “the priests of the Lord…refer to the head, that is to the seat of the apostle Peter, the pope.
          
Pope Liberius (352 – 366) is the first to use the term sedes apostolica (Apostolic See)to identify Rome.

The Roman Primacy is claimed during a series of synods, of which the most important is that of 382, with its “Decree of Damasus”. This, which claims primacy for the Roman Church “of the evangelical word of the Lord and saviour, who said: you are Peter. Pope Damasus was the first to declare himself the “Apostolic See and  emphasied the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome over all other bishops. He was succeede by Siricus.
            
Pope Siricius (384 – 399) writes that “the blessed Apostle Peter…protects and defends we who are heirs of his ministry” (DS 181 – 185). He also uses the expression sollicitudo omnium ecclesiarum (concern for all the churches). It was he to first apply the term "pope" to himself not to other bishops anymore in a strict sense of the term, and the first to issue a formal decretal - a ruling with binding legal precedent - on disputes in the Church. It remains the Catholic view today that "in all his decrees the pope speaks with the consciousness of his supreme ecclesiastical authority and of his pastoral care over all the churches."

 In 440 – 604, there developed a theological argument for the primacy of Rome.
      
Pope Leo I the Great (440 – 461) who stressed that the pope is the heir and vicar of Peter and the primate of all the bishops and principal of the universal Church. Since then, to the pope, were coming the most serious questions in the church and he spoke with the authority of Peter as seen in the Evangelium Vitae of 1995, 57 and 62).
      
Between 525 and 535 the word “pope” became generally accepted as a title, distinct from its older use by all  bishops in general. The schism around Simmacus (498 – 514), when till 506 there was also an antipope Lorenzus, was instrumental in the use of this title, in the sense that the Synod in 502 and Ennodius, who supported Simmacus, called him “pope”. However, the true change came during the pontificate of John I (523 – 526): the Liber Pontificalis puts the word before his name. For Felix IV (526 – 530) and Boniface II (530 – 532) this way predominated, and for Agapitus (535 – 536) and Silverius (536 – 537) it became exclusive to the bishop of Rome the centre of Catholicism.
       
We have seen that the Pope (sucessor of st Peter the apostle), in the first place he is a Bishop. An that the true priesthood of Christ subsists in bishops, what about priests and deacons?
          
Priests and deacons
       
We find in the New Testament., persons who has authority in local churches which was not directly linked with the twelve apostle, Titus 1:5: “The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders (presbyter)in every town…entrusted with God's work”. These presbyters are the present day reverand fathers and this office  does not indicate directly apostolic authority. Yet Titus, however, who is not a local “bishop” does exercise such authority of the apostles indirectly. Timothy has a parallel situation with regard to Ephesus (1 Tim).
                   
So the priests as we call them today, are in this category and were refered to as presbute,rouj/Presbyter 1 Peter 5,1-2.  presbu,teroj presbuteros {pres-boo'-ter-os} meaning elder but not in the sense of aged, but,  seniors forefathers, it was a term of rank or office  among the Jews; members of the great council or Sanhedrin. It should be noted that one was not ordained priest before 30 years of age.

Instead for the deacons derived the title from,  diaco,noij , dia,konoj diakonos {dee-ak'-on-os} meaning: a servant , one who executes the commands of another, esp. of a master, a servant, attendant, minister, the servant of a king. It came to mean in the church, one who, by virtue of the office assigned to him by the church, cares for the poor and has charge of and distributes the money collected for their use, one who serves food and drinks.  One was not to be ordained deacon before at least 25 years of age (diakonia means service).
           
The functions of priest and deacon
         
The role of the priest had to be defined in relation to that of the bishop. He celebrates the Eucharist when the bishop was not present, but did not give sermonies. A particle of the great host from the bishop’s Mass was carried to the various churches of the diocese and put in the chalice of the celebrating priest a practice called fermentum. Tracts on the priesthood were written by Ambrosius (d. 397) De officiis; Gregory of Nazianzus (d. 390), Second discourse, John Chrysostom (d. 407) Dialogue on the priesthood; Pope Gregory I the Great (d. 604) Pastoral Rule. In 527, the Second Council (Synod) of Toledo (Spain) instituted a “seminary”; in 633, the Fourth Council of Toledo confirmed this.
           
The deacons directly serve the bishops not  priests. They helped the bishops both in the liturgy and in  charitable assistances as well as in the administration of temporal goods. They had more influence than the priests hence more noticeable to the people. The bishop was usually chosen from amongst the deacons (better known and perhaps more popular) rather than the priests. It was the Synod of Arles of 314, canon 16, that gave more powers to priests over deacons.        
           
Clerical dress (Martin Down, “The costume of the clergy”, in Theology 85 (1982) 346-353.)

 The clergy did not have a particular form of clothing in the ancient Church, although they had to wear best clothes for the liturgy (Apostolic Constitutions, 375). At other times the clergy conformed to the style of the laity, according to their social class, although with simplicity. In fact Pope Celestinus I condemned a “simplicity” that seemed to be a search for distinction (Writing to priests (and bishops?) from Arles in Gaul in 428, he mentions “we should distinguish ourselves with our doctrine not our clothes, with our lives not with our dress” (PL 50, 429-434). He is referring, probably, to those monks who had come to the city wearing monastic dress (cloak, belt, staff), sensing that this was being done for superstitious reasons.). The bishop dressed as other Christians, having to instruct the faithful rather than divert them.
      
Amongst the monks, by contrast, distinctive clothing (often black) did develop that was interpreted, spiritually, as a re-clothing by Christ (Gal 3,27) for a second time, after baptism.

Clerical dress developed by the maintenance of traditional (long) clothing in contrast to the general change of style after the five century and the Germanic invasions. While liturgical vestments were copied from the Roman emperor’s ceremonial clothings and gave them theological meanings.
                   
Clerical celibacy

There is divergence of interpretations of the historical data on the celibacy of the clergy. Some maintain that it was introduced for the Latin clergy around 300 and, in a mitigated way, for the eastern clergy in 692. Others that it had an “apostolic origin”, and was present from the beginning in both West and East, but was mitigated (for priests only) in the East in 692.         

Woman deacons and presbyters in the catholic church
                       
There were women ministers in the catholic church as a continuation of that group of women talked of in the New Testament. Women had a strong presence in the group that follows Jesus, eg Mark 15:40 and Matt 27, 55 and Luke 8:1. The Greek word used is diaco,nei/n, meaning “to serve, and many women served Jesus and the church.

Texts in Paul and the Acts of the Apostles talk of women ministers.

     
Paul rote, “greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow-workers in Christ Jesus. 6:Greet Mary, who worked very hard for you… 7:Greet Andronicus and Junias (was a women), my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was…

      
Acts 17:34: “A few women became followers of Paul such as: Dionysius, Areopagus, Damaris, and a number of others.

Philippians 4:2: “I plead with Euodia and I plead with Syntyche to agree with each other in the Lord. 3:Yes, and I ask you, loyal yoke-fellow, help these women who have contended at my side in the cause of the gospel, along with Clement and the rest of my fellow-workers, whose names are in the book of life.

        
12:Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those women who work hard in the Lord. Greet my dear friend Persis, another woman who has worked very hard in the Lord. 13:Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too. 15:Greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas and all the saints with them.

Acts 16:14: “One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshipper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message.

      
Acts 9:36: “In Joppa there was a disciple named Tabitha (which, when translated, is Dorcas), who was always doing good and helping the poor.”

Romans 16:1: “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church in Cenchrea...

The Didascalia of the Apostles (Syria, before 250), mentions the specific ministry of women deacons, gunh, dia,conoj, h, dia,conoj. These are seen as having special ministry to other women, but do not preach (3,5,6) or baptise (3,8,9).

The Ecclesiastical Canons of the Apostles (Egypt, after 300) recognised that this was an important question. The conclusion was that women’s ministry was only to the assistance of the needy (24,1 – 28,1) and that they could not officiate in the celebration of the Eucharist. The Fourth Council of Carthage (398) forbade women to baptise (cap. 99-100).

Some interesting observations in these texts include:
      
a.po,stoloi (apostles) in  Romans 16:7, appears to include the case of Junias, who was a woman. However, it is ambiguous whether this is sense one (ie a delegate, messenger, one sent forth with orders) or sense two (ie specifically applied to the twelve apostles of Christ, and in a broader sense applied to other eminent Christian teachers).
      
Phoebe (a woman)is described as a “deacon” (Romans 16:1) in the way Paul describes himself in Col 1,23)  even  in Phil 1:1,  Philip  the Evangelist is mentioned as one of “the Seven Deacons” in Acts 21:8 ). Phoebe ( who was a woman) is also described as prosta,tij of Paul, a term which he used to  mean “presider”.
      
presbu,teraj. (1 Tim 5:2) This might be the Christian function of “presbyter” (which also translates as elder), but given the context is more likely to mean “older women”. The masculine plural form of the word is used in 1 Tim 5:17, which is open to two interpretations: either exclusively men or men and women. Note that 1 Tim 5, 3-16 refers to the mention of the “list of widows”, who receive their own ministry. The Apostolic Constitutions, Book 8 (Syria, around 400) contain the text, “You have established women guardians of the holy doors, guard also now your (female) servant. who has been elected to your service and grant her the Holy Spirit” (cap. 19-20).

However,after 300 on words, women’s ministry began to be doubted and emphasis was put on some biblical texts  that distinguish women’s role from men’s such as:
     
1 Corinthians 14:34: “women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35, if they want to enquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.”

Colossians 3:18: “Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.”

Ephesians 5:22: “Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23:For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church.  24, now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”
      
1 Timothy 2:11: “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12, i do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man. 13, for Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14, and Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

As a consequence, women ministry begun being questioned.
      
The argument being that Jesus would then have been baptised by his mother rather than John if God intended women to be ministers.

Then they began by forbidding women ministers from blessing and in general does forbade from not doing what male priests and deacons did. And finally women ministries were wiped off from the church up today, the highest rank they can reach at is that of a reverend sister is a consecrated life for the Lord but not a ministry in the church.

 

The writer is a holder of a PhD in Philosophy and BA in Theology-Rome