Someone less interested in Apologetics ...

Q

Seeing that Roman Catholics believe the first Pope was St. Peter, who was, according to others, the real first Pope?
https://www.quora.com/Seeing-that-Roman-Catholics-believe-the-first-Pope-was-St-Peter-who-was-according-to-others-the-real-first-Pope/answers/64101481

Al Lundy

Husband, father, brother, son, community volunteer, "common sense isnt common"

Answered Nov 22

If the Catholic Church sees the Bishop of Rome as their Pope, and they see Peter as the first Bishop of Rome.,..then what difference does it make what non-catholics see as the first Bishop of Rome since they are not in communion with either the Pope or the Church?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

3h ago

Some do see Peter as first bishop of Rome, but not yet as Pope, and I’d like to know on their view which “bishop of Rome” started to claim papal prerogatives and get them.

Some do not even admit Peter was even in Rome, taking “Babylon” not as code for a city on Tiber, but as literal for a city on Euphrates. I’d like to know when they claim:

• Rome started to have bishops
• Roman bishops started to claim jurisdictional succession from Peter and Paul
• Roman bishops claiming such started to claim and get Papal prerogatives.

My hoped for answer is, they won’t be able to agree.

Al Lundy

50m ago

Your understanding of Pope's and Bishops is incorrect. The Bishop of Rome is the Pope, the successor of the seat of Peter the first Bishop of Rome.

The Apostles were the first Bishops, evangelizition to specific territories, establishing churches as then traveled their region and ordaining presbyters (priests)to continue whe work of the church.

Pope is a term of endearment which developed over the years for the Bishop of Rome. It is short for Papa.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

43m ago

Your understanding of grammar is incorrect.

I referenced non-Catholic positions, and you took them as being mine.

You are wrong on what my position is, and no word of mine justifies your error.

I am a Catholic, even if we don’t agree on who is the Pope.

Either you are so allergic to me because I am creationist and against Bergoglio that you are willing to attribute to me any anti-Catholic stance I even mention as that of someone else, or you have a more general reading comprehension problem.

My question was about what non-Catholics believed, not about what I believe. My explanation to you was about what non-Catholics believe, not about what I believe. Got it this time?

Al Lundy

Just now

Sorry if I got your post wrong. It does not read as clearly as you perceive it.

What does being a creationist have to do with one’s opinion of the current Pope? One stance has nothing to do with the other.

Please be polite or be deleted.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Just now

“What does being a creationist have to do with one’s opinion of the current Pope? One stance has nothing to do with the other.”

With a bit better reading skills than you seem to have - is this polite enough - I was giving two guesses on why you were so allergic to me that you were misreading the previous comment.

Apparently

it was not polite enough for him, since he now deleted the comments under his answer - to my question.

I am sorry I did perhaps in haste misread his question "What does being a creationist have to do with one’s opinion of the current Pope?" as the more relevant one "What does being a creationist have to do with one’s opinion of who is the current Pope?" - by speaking of a certain man as "Bergoglio" I think it should be clear I do not refer to him as "Pope Francis", that is, I do not consider he is the Pope./HGL

Note also, this dialogue took place yesterday./HGL