If you ask a billion Catholics who was the first bishop of Rome, they’ll give you one name immediately: St. Peter. It’s the foundation of the entire Papacy. But if you sit down with a secular historian or a critical scholar, things get messy. Fast. History isn't always a straight line from point A to point B, especially when point A is two thousand years ago in a city that was currently trying to set Christians on fire.
The question of who was the first bishop of Rome is actually two different questions. It's a question of faith and a question of organizational history. Depending on which lens you look through, the answer changes from "Peter" to "Linus" or even "nobody yet."
The Apostle in the City
Peter is the obvious candidate. He’s the "Rock." According to the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus basically handed him the keys to the kingdom. Tradition says Peter traveled to Rome, led the underground church, and was eventually crucified upside down in Nero’s Circus around 64 AD. You can go to the Vatican today, look under the high altar, and see the bones that many believe belong to him.
But here’s the kicker. The New Testament never actually says Peter was the "Bishop" of Rome. It says he was an Apostle. In the first century, those were two different jobs. An Apostle was a traveling missionary, a founder, a big-picture guy. A pappas or episkopos (the Greek word for bishop) was more like a local manager.
Did Peter lead the Roman Christians? Almost certainly. Was he the "Bishop" in the way we think of a guy in a miter sitting on a throne? Probably not. The early church in Rome was more like a loose network of house churches meeting in living rooms and basements. They didn't have a single "CEO" for quite a while.
Enter Linus: The man on the list
If you look at the Annuario Pontificio, the official directory of the Holy See, you'll see Peter at #1. But if you look at the oldest surviving lists of Roman bishops, things get interesting.
Irenaeus of Lyons, writing around 180 AD, is one of our best early sources. In his work Against Heresies, he tries to prove that his version of Christianity is the real one by tracing a line of succession back to the Apostles. He says the "blessed apostles" (Peter and Paul) founded the church in Rome and then handed the office of the episcopate to a man named Linus.
Wait. Linus?
Yes, the same Linus mentioned by Paul in the second letter to Timothy. According to Irenaeus, the Apostles didn't count themselves as the first bishops; they were the founders who appointed the first bishop. By this logic, Linus was the first actual Bishop of Rome.
✨ Don't miss: Green Emerald Day Massage: Why Your Body Actually Needs This Specific Therapy
The Liber Pontificalis, a sort of "Who’s Who" of early popes compiled centuries later, agrees that Linus was the first to follow Peter. It even claims he was from Tuscany and that his father’s name was Herculanus. Whether that’s true or just later biographers filling in the blanks is anyone's guess.
The Clement Confusion
Then there’s Clement. He’s a heavyweight in early Christian writing. His "First Epistle of Clement" is one of the oldest Christian documents outside the Bible.
Tertullian, writing in the late second century, says that Peter actually ordained Clement as the first bishop. This contradicts the Linus theory. To make it even more confusing, St. Jerome suggests that most Latin-speaking Christians in his day thought Clement was the direct successor to Peter, while the Greek-speaking East leaned toward Linus.
How do we reconcile this? Maybe they were all part of a leadership council. Maybe Linus handled one group of house churches and Clement handled another. History is rarely as tidy as a list on a Wikipedia page.
Why the title "Bishop" is tricky
To understand who was the first bishop of Rome, we have to stop imagining the Vatican. Rome in 70 AD was a dangerous place for a Christian. There was no "Pope." There was no central office.
Most historians, like Eamon Duffy in his masterpiece Saints and Sinners: A History of the Popes, argue that the Roman church was governed by a group of elders (presbyters) rather than a single bishop until the mid-second century. This is called "presbyterial governance."
It wasn't until around 140 or 150 AD, during the time of Anicetus or Pius I, that we see one single guy clearly emerging as the undisputed head of the Roman church.
So, if you’re looking for the first "monarchical" bishop—the first guy who functioned like a modern Pope—the answer might actually be much later than Peter or Linus.
🔗 Read more: The Recipe Marble Pound Cake Secrets Professional Bakers Don't Usually Share
The Paul Factor
We can't talk about the first bishop without mentioning Paul. Tradition usually lumps Peter and Paul together as the "Founders" of the Roman See. Paul lived there. He wrote his most famous letter to the Romans. He died there.
Why isn't Paul ever called the first bishop?
Mostly because Paul’s brand was "Apostle to the Gentiles." He was a traveler. He was the guy who started the fire and moved on to the next city. Peter, despite his travels, became more closely associated with the specific local leadership of the Roman community in his final years.
What the archeology says
In the 1940s and 50s, excavations under St. Peter’s Basilica found a tomb. Around it were ancient graffiti saying things like "Peter is within."
While this doesn't prove he held the title of "Bishop," it proves that from a very, very early date, the Roman Christians believed Peter was their guy. They centered their identity around him. Whether he was called "The First Bishop" or "The First Among Us," the role he played was the seed from which the entire office grew.
Sorting through the names
If you want a definitive answer, you basically have to choose your favorite historical source:
- The Church Tradition: St. Peter (approx. 30–64 AD).
- The Earliest Lists (Irenaeus): Linus (approx. 67–76 AD).
- The Alternate Tradition (Tertullian): Clement (approx. 88–99 AD).
- The Secular Academic View: Nobody. The office didn't exist in a singular form until the 2nd century.
Why it still matters
This isn't just a trivia question for history nerds. The identity of the first bishop is the core of "Apostolic Succession." This is the idea that spiritual authority is passed down like a baton in a relay race. If you can’t prove who had the baton first, the whole race looks a little different.
For some, Linus is the answer because he represents the first "administrator." For others, Peter is the only answer that carries the weight of divine appointment.
💡 You might also like: Why the Man Black Hair Blue Eyes Combo is So Rare (and the Genetics Behind It)
Honestly, the most likely reality is that the early Roman church was a bit of a chaotic, beautiful mess of small groups, and the "Bishop" role evolved over time to keep everyone on the same page.
Digging deeper on your own
If you want to get to the bottom of this yourself, don't just take my word for it. There are a few things you can do to see the evidence with your own eyes.
First, go read the First Epistle of Clement. It’s short. It gives you a vibe for what the Roman church sounded like just a few decades after Peter. You'll notice he doesn't call himself "The Pope." He speaks on behalf of the whole community.
Second, look into the excavations of the Scavi under the Vatican. There are some great virtual tours available that show the "Trophy of Gaius," a small monument built in the 2nd century to mark Peter's grave.
Third, check out Eusebius of Caesarea. He was the first real "Church Historian" in the 4th century. He tries to piece together these lists and admits even back then that it was a bit of a puzzle.
Understanding the origins of the Roman Bishopric isn't about finding one "gotcha" fact. It’s about seeing how a tiny, persecuted group in the capital of a pagan empire turned into the most enduring institution in human history. Whether it started with Peter's shadow or Linus’s paperwork, the impact is the same.
Start by comparing the lists in Irenaeus’s Against Heresies with the Liber Pontificalis. You’ll see the discrepancies yourself, and that’s where the real history begins.