A very
useful resource on the papacy is that of Anglican Edward Giles’ Documents Illustrating Papal Authority
(1954). One can find a copy online on Archive.org. It is a much more balanced
work than many other works from Catholics and non-Catholics on the papacy, such
as the more superficial apologetic works and critical publications one will encounter
online and elsewhere.
Commenting
on 1 Clement 1, 56, 58-59, 63, Giles wrote:
The apology for delay at the beginning of the
letter suggests that the Corinthian Christians had written to Rome for advice
in their dispute about the authority of the ministry. The church of Corinth was
founded by Paul, and John the apostle was probably still alive, but it is Rome,
some 600 miles away, which intervenes, and Gore admits that the letter is
written with a tone of considerable authority . . .The force of this may be a
little weakened by the act that Julius Caesar had repopulated Corinth with
Italian freemen in 46 B.C., so that it was racially close touch with Rome.
Roman Catholics are fond of quoting the great
Anglican authority Lightfoot, who wrote, “It may perhaps seem strange to
describe this noble remonstrance as the first step towards papal domination.
And yet undoubtedly this is the case (Apostolic
Fathers, Part I, Vol. I, p. 70). But Lightfoot also says that Clement
writes as the mouthpiece of the Roman Church, and on terms of equality with the
Corinthians, not as a successor of Peter (Ibid., pp. 69, 70). (Edward Giles, Documents Illustrating Papal Authority A.D.
96-454 [London: SPCK, 1952], 2-3)
On Ignatius,
To the Romans 1, 3, 4, 9 and the
meaning of “presides in the district of the Region of the Romans” and the
Church of Rome “having the presidency of the love,” two phrases Roman Catholic
apologists cite to show early papal primacy, Giles notes:
Here is early witness to the planting of the
Roman church by Peter and Paul, but our main interest lies in the preface.
Contrast the magnificent array of words with the simpler salutations to the
other churches . . . What is the meaning of “presides in the district of the
region of the Romans”? Does it indicate the place where the presiding church of
Christendom is situated, or does it describe the limits of the jurisdiction of
the Roman Church? Tertullian says “The very seats of the apostles preside over
their own places” (Tertullian, De Praescriptione,
36) Again, “having the presidency of the love may mean that the Roman church
presides over the whole church . . . But against this we see at the end of [To the Romans 4] the love and the Church
are distinct. η αγαπη seems in
some sense to denote the unity of the faithful.
Newman found no difficulty in the fact that
the Pope is never mentioned by Ignatius. He thought that the occasion for the
exercise of papal authority had not yet arisen (Development of Christian Doctrine [1845], p. 167). (Ibid., 5)
