Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 9 years ago

Catholics, how was the next Pope selected after Peter?

You believe Peter was the first Pope, how was the next Pope selected and how did that trend continue?

11 Answers

Relevance
  • 9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    The successor of St. Peter was elected by the Church which included the Magistrium and the lay faithful of the Church. Pope St. Linus is briefly mentioned in the Bible in 2 Timothy 4:21.

    There was no position of Cardinals during the 1st century, and even Non-Clergy were allowed to elect the Pope.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    5 years ago

    This Site Might Help You.

    RE:

    Catholics, how was the next Pope selected after Peter?

    You believe Peter was the first Pope, how was the next Pope selected and how did that trend continue?

    Source(s): catholics pope selected peter: https://shortly.im/gsBa4
    • Login to reply the answers
  • Carole
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Of course we can. The pope is a vessel for our magisterial teaching authority, but he is not the source of our life or our intellect. Let's say, for example, that the pope died and that for some reason the election of the new pope was delayed for 100 years. During that time, the church would continue on with each bishop acting in their own authority for their diocese and with the college of bishops acting together. However, likewise during that time there would be no magisterial authority which could be confirmed by the pope, so the process of doctrinal clarification by magisterium would be more or less at a stand still... ie, what we believe currently would be still in effect, but clarification of doctrine for modern time (such as church ruling on embrionic stem cell research or on the imaculate conception) would wait until the next seated pope to confirm it.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    In ancient days the pope was pope by virtue of being bishop of Rome, rather than the other way around. Only the Roman clergy had a voice in electing him. It's an interesting sophistry, typical of Catholics, that this is still true today: every member of the College of Cardinals is a titular bishop, priest or deacon of a church in the diocese of Rome. (That is why they are called Cardinal Deacons, Cardinal Priests or Cardinal Bishops -- it has nothing to do with their normal rank of ordination in the church, nearly all of them being bishops.)

    Ancient records of bishops of Rome, recorded by Irenaeus, Julius Africanus, Hippolytus, Eusebius, and the Liberian catalogue of 354 (the others are earlier; 2nd century) list Linus after Peter. There is a dissenting opinion, from Tertullian, who says Clement came after Peter. Irenaeus, whose records are oldest, identifies Linus with the Linus mentioned by Paul in 1 Timothy. He says that Peter and Paul handed the office over to Linus, who was followed by Anacletus. No details are given on how these men were chosen.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • jaytee
    Lv 4
    9 years ago

    Yes.

    How: through a papal election which has varied considerably throughout the history of the church but here's an excerpt from a site I found that may explain it better than I can.

    -------

    Who Elects the Next Pope?

    The current pope does not designate a successor nor is the pope elected by popular vote of all Catholics, although both of these methods have been used at various times in the past. {2} Instead, the pope is elected by 120 elector cardinals. Cardinals are bishops who are directly appointed by the pope at various points during his pontificate. Although they have lots of other jobs to keep them busy during a pope's often lengthy tenure, the primary role of cardinals is to elect the next pope. There are usually more than 120 cardinals at any one time, but not all are elector cardinals. Under current church law, cardinals must be under 80 years of age, of sound mind, and present in person at the elections to be eligible to vote.

    ------

    Source(s): http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/features... taken a four years of theology
    • Login to reply the answers
  • 3 years ago

    Pope Linus

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    Linus: Peter, were trapped. They'll find us soon.

    Peter: It's okay, I have an idea. Here! Hold my staff!

    Linus: Peter, what do you--

    [Peter puts his hands firmly on Linus' head]

    Linus: What the -- !

    Peter: You're a bishop now Linus. I'm going out to attract their attention. You sneak out the other way when you can.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    As there was no College of Cardinals until the 11th century, we will have to assume that either Peter named his successor or, as was the case later, the clergy of Rome elected a new bishop. I am, however, inclined to believe the former.

    Good question; you get a star.

    IHS

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    Bishops were selected by the priests and leaders of his diocese. The Bishop of Rome was probably no exception. This is, of course, speculation but practically there is no other alternative that is plausible.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Rene
    Lv 7
    9 years ago

    The Papacy is of pagan origin. The title of pope or universal bishop, was first given to the bishop of Rome by the wicked Emperor Phocas, in the year 610 AD.

    This he did to spite Bishop Ciriacus of Constantinople, who had justly excommunicated him for having caused the assassination of his predecessor emperor Mauritius. Gregory I, then bishop of Rome, refused the title, but his successor, Boniface III, first assumed title "pope".

    Jesus did not appoint Peter to the leadership of the apostles and forbade such notion. (Luke 22:24-26; Eph.1:22-3; Col.1:18; I Cor.3:11).

    Note:- Nor is there any mention in Scripture, nor in history, that Peter ever was in Rome, much less that he was pope there for 25 years; Clement, 3rd. bishop of Rome, remarks that "there is no real 1st century evidence that Peter ever was in Rome."

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.