Who was the third Catholic Pope?

Answer 1

Saint Linus succeeded Saint Peter as the second bishop of Rome (Pope).

Answer

Although there is no official list of popes, Saint Linus is considered as the second pope. (According to the Annuario Pontificio.)

Catholic Answer

There is absolutely no doubt that Christ appointed Peter as the first head of his new Church:

"And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18)

That leadership was acknowledged by the early Church and even St. Paul deferred to Peter. In the earliest years Peter ruled the Church from Jerusalem and from Antioch during the years when Emperor Claudius expelled all Jews from Rome. There is no doubt that Peter returned to Rome when this expulsion was lifted by Nero and numerous scripture allude to this. Even all mainline Protestant denominations concede that Peter was in Rome and died there.

While Peter was the first leader of the Church, the term "Pope" did not come into common use until centuries later as the Church evolved. However, the successors of Peter were always acknowledged as the leader. The tradition that the ruling pope was the bishop of Rome was a natural outgrowth of the developing hierarchy of the Church. He was the highest ranking Church authority in Rome so he was automatically the bishop of Rome. However, there is nothing sacrosanct that Rome must be the headquarters of the Church. It is just a tradition. At anytime the ruling pope could move the leadership anywhere of his choosing.

Even in the Church there exists confusion about the first successors of Peter. There are no written records dating back to those times. Some say Linus was the handpicked choice of Peter. Others say Anacletus or Clement succeeded Peter. Based on the meager information available, Linus is considered to be the second leader (Pope)of the Church although there is no absolute confirmation of this. This is why there is no official numbering of the papacies.

Answer 2

There is absolutely no doubt that Christ appointed Peter as the first head of his new Church: "And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18) That leadership was acknowledged by the early Church and even St. Paul deferred to Peter. In the earliest years Peter ruled the Church from Jerusalem and from Antioch during the years when Emperor Claudius expelled all Jews from Rome. There is no doubt that Peter returned to Rome when this expulsion was lifted by Nero and numerous scripture allude to this. Even all mainline Protestant denominations concede that Peter was in Rome and died there. While Peter was the first leader of the Church, the term "Pope" did not come into common use until centuries later as the Church evolved. However, the successors of Peter were always acknowledged as the leader. The tradition that the ruling pope was the bishop of Rome was a natural outgrowth of the developing hierarchy of the Church. He was the highest ranking Church authority in Rome so he was automatically the bishop of Rome. However, there is nothing sacrosanct that Rome must be the headquarters of the Church. It is just a tradition. At anytime the ruling pope could move the leadership anywhere of his choosing. Even in the Church there exists confusion about the first successors of Peter. There are no written records dating back to those times. Some say Linus was the handpicked choice of Peter. Others say Anacletus or Clement succeeded Peter. Based on the meager information available, Linus is considered to be the second leader (Pope)of the Church although there is no absolute confirmation of this. This is why there is no official numbering of the papacies.

Answer 3

Catholic tradition says that Saint Linus was the choice of Saint Peter to succeed him as leader of the Church. There is some confusion about the earliest popes so no one can categorically make the statement that Linus was the second, third or forth pope. This is why there is no official Vatican list of popes. By the way, the term pope did not come into common use until many years later. However, the Church does consider Linus to be the second pope.

Answer 4

Francis Aloysius Sullivan (From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church) says that the consensus of scholars is that on the available evidence, the church of Rome was led by a college of presbyters, rather than a single bishop, for at least several decades of the second century. The first bishop of Rome who is firmly attested is Anicetus (157-158), making it possible that his successor,Soter, the second bishop of the Roman church. However, the bishops of Rome only took the definitive title of 'pope' in the fourth century.

The official Catholic position is that Linus was the second pope, after Saint Peter. The Church relies on sources that are so ancient that we could think of them as almost contemporary with Linus, but they still come from centuries after the event. Some sources, the earliest of which was Irenaeus in 180, give Linus as the second pope, while others say Clement was the second bishop of Rome. 'The Apostolic Constitutions' says that Linus was really the first bishop of Rome, and was ordained by Paul. These conflicting positions are based on legends of dubious value.

Answer 5

We can not be sure that Saint Peter was the first pope, as there is no evidence that he ever visited Rome, nor that he became the leader of the Christian Church in Rome. Francis Aloysius Sullivan (From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church) says that the consensus of scholars is that on the available evidence, the church of Rome was led by a college of presbyters, rather than a single bishop, for at least several decades of the second century. On this view, we should not look for a bishop of Rome or a pope until later in the second century.

The first bishop of Rome who is firmly attested is Anicetus (157-158), making his successor, Soter, the second bishop of the Roman church. However, the bishops of Rome only took the definitive title of 'pope' in the fourth century.

It seems to be a second-century tradition that Peter was the first bishop of Rome, and most of our supposed sources for his successors are even later. Some sources, the earliest of which was Irenaeus in 180, give Linus as the second pope, while others say Clement was the second bishop of Rome. 'The Apostolic Constitutions' says that Linus was really the first bishop of Rome, but that he was ordained by Paul, with his successor, Clement, ordained by Peter - in which case Peter would still be alive during during the time of two popes. These conflicting positions are based on legends of dubious value, but if Peter was the first pope, either Linus or Clement was second.

Answer 6

St. Anacletus, also rendered as Cletus or Anencletus. He reigned from 76/79AD? to 88/91?AD. Little is known of him save that he died a martyr.