Roland

The Los Angeles Times had a most unusual graphic today (October 17, 2003) accompanying an article on the pope.

It listed ALL popes all the way back to Peter - not their names, mind you, but the amount of time they "served." For instance, it showed that Peter was pope from AD 32-67. Then it showed #2 as having served 8 years, #3 12 years and so forth all the way up to Pope John Paul II.

My question is how did they come up with all this information? Is there any real evidence that a "pope" reigned from 68-76 AD and that another ruled from 77-99 etc.?

Or is this all just nonsense?

Roland

I see I failed to mention that the source for the chart is newadvent.org.

Toto

The source of this chart is probably early church historians such as Eusebius, Iraeneus, and Tertullian. In other words, it is based on rumor, hearsay, and political propaganda, like much other ancient history.

A useful source is Wikipedia’s List of Popes. You can read about St. Linus here. It does not appear that there is a lot of solid history here:

Bernard Muller

I made some research on the beginning of true bishopry in the Christian world.
It started at the earliest around 135 in Asia minor, and confirmed in Corinth & Rome at about 165.
But the "catholic" bishop in Rome was far to have supremacy on the others. I do not even know when it started but not before the 3rd or 4th century, if not later.
I have a page where I treat of the Ignatian letters (all forgeries) but also the "early bishops", more so the ones in Rome, and the legend of Paul & Peter in Rome, preaching side by side ('Peter in Rome', on its own, is legendary too).
http://www.concentric.net/~Mullerb/ignatius.shtml

Eusebius, early 4th century, was the first one to provide names and dates for the bishops in Rome, Alexandria & Antioch, but the early ones appear to be all made up, including Clement of Rome & Ignatius.

Best regards, Bernard

RED DAVE

Just a quick question: I have the impression (couldn't find a source) that JPII is the longest-reigning pope. True?

RED DAVE

Mageth

No. He's fourth, if you count St. Peter.

Pius IX (1846-1878): 31 years and 7 months, is second behind Peter.

RED DAVE

From Mageth:Thanx. I knew there was some 19th century guy who had the record, but I thought it was one of the Leos.

RED DAVE

offa

Roland
Who Was the 2nd "Pope"?

Is there any real evidence that a "pope" reigned from 68-76 AD and
that another ruled from 77-99 etc.?

Offa,
I have other resources; (ISBN 0-8028-8094-0, p.75)

The epistle in which the same Clement, writing to James the Lord's
brother, informs him of the death of Peter, and that he had left him
his successor in his chair and teaching, and in which also the whole
subject of church order is treated, I have not prefixed to this work,
both because it is of later date, and because I have already
translated and published it. But I do not think it out of place to
explain here what in that letter will perhaps seem to some to be
inconsistent. For some ask, Since Linus and Cletus were bishops in the
city of Rome before this Clement, how could Clement himself, writing
to James, say that the chair of teaching was handed over to him by
Peter? Now of this we have heard this explanation, that Linus and
Cletus were indeed bishops in the city of Rome before Clement, but
during the lifetime of Peter: that is, that they undertook the care of
the episcopate, and that he fulfilled the office of apostleship; as is
found also to have been the case at Caesarea, where, when he himself
was present, he yet had Zacchaeus, ordained by himself, as bishop. And
in this way both statements will appear to be true, both that these
bishops are reckoned before Clement, and yet that Clement received the
teacher's seat on the death of Peter. But now let us see how Clement,
writing to James the Lord's brother, begins his narrative.

(ISBN 0-8028-8094-0, p.75)

Offa ponders, "Did Peter die before James was murdered?"
(ISBN 0-06-067782-1, p.284)

AD 62 (In about March AD 62, Ananus-Demas was made high priest in
Jerusalem. During his 3-month reign he caused James, the brother of
Jesus to be stoned to death (Ant. 20:197-203).

Encyclopaedia Britannica Article
Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus
Germanicus, was the fifth Roman emperor from AD 54 to AD 68).

Also;

Encyclopaedia Britannica Article
St. Peter the Apostle
died c. AD 64 , Rome

Offa, "I believe that Peter was not martyred and hung upside down."

anti-X

It is all "nonsense", like you say.

What is 'interesting' about Satan-Simon-Peter (ref to Matthew were gZeus calls simon-peter a "satan") is that in either of the two books entitled "peter" in their New Testament is where "peter" sends a greeting from "Babylon". This is reasoned --by different factions-- to be either of three choices:
1) "babylon" is 'code' for Rome --Roamin' catholic
2) "babylon" means the geographical, Old Testament Babylon --Protestant, Eastern Orthodox
3) "babylon" was the name of a major Roman fortress (system) located in the vicinity of what is now Cairo and down to Elephant Island --> which is now under the waters of the Aswan High Dam. Nestorians, Coptic and other sects.

Also, if murderer and persecuter Saul-Paul was really a "savior" of chwistian teaching --which is why his epistles and letters dominate the New Testament-- then why isn't he a "pope"?

anti-X

Mageth, if you read "Offa" above, how could Satan-Simon-Peter be the longest reigning pope?