Before the autumn of the Roman Empire you must halt and look at the power that was held within the 1000000s of stat mis of land. edifice. people. metropoliss. male monarchs. and imposts. The Roman Empire was non known for being merely another metropolis or imperium but it was known for its strength. power and triumphs in the times of struggle and wars. The Roman imperium was built up to what it was right up until the autumn by powerful male monarchs and swayers who ne’er imagined that the one time untouchable imperium would one twenty-four hours fall but non everyone had that same head set of the great imperium harmonizing to Katell Berthelot in their Hagiographas in the Journal for the Study of Judaism they wrote that. Philo’s perceptual experience of Rome is less positive than has by and large been argued. Although Philo appreciated the kiss of peace romana and the spiritual freedom by and large enjoyed by Jews in the Roman Empire. he was however critical of Rome.
In peculiar. he rejected the thought that the Roman Empire was the result of godly Providence and would last everlastingly. He opposed the religious kingship of Israel to the worldly and ephemeral rule of Rome. Furthermore. he expected Roman regulation to melt away in the terminal. and Israel to bloom as no other state of all time had in the yesteryear. Even though the great Roman Empire did finally fall you must halt and see it for what it was and the enormousness of its content and glorification. The Roman Catholic Church has a great history that is tied into the life of some of the greatest Prophetss. sermonizers. talkers and revivalist. The church was set aside from other churches and faiths due to its accents on chew overing redemptions harmonizing to Walter A. Elwell in his book Evangelical Dictionary of Theology ; The most typical features of Roman Catholicism has ever been its divinity of the church ( its ecclesiology ) . The church’s function in chew overing redemption has been emphasized more than in other Christian traditions. The Power of the Papacy of Rome
The start of the Roman Catholic Church took topographic point through misinterpreted words when Jesus said to Peter in Matthew 16:18. on this stone I will construct my church. Some would reason that the bishop of Rome is to come after the great Peter and so would be called the “rock” of the church. Matthew 16:19 says. I will give you the keys of the land of Eden ; whatever you bind on Earth will be bound in Eden. and whatever you loose on Earth will be loosed in Eden. These Bibles were meant to demo that Jesus was giving Peter a great authorization every bit good as go throughing it on to those who come after Peter in Rome. There are really many misconstrued ideas and theories on these two Bibles but it is all brought to visible radiation in verse 16 of what Jesus was truly seeking to state on that twenty-four hours in those words in Matthew 16:16. Simon Peter answered. You are the Christ. the Son of the life God.
Throughout the centuries the Roman Catholic Church has been at the centre of most of these theories we have merely discussed and we as a church in general must recognize that we as “the church” must understand that the keys of Edens were non merely laid into the custodies of the great work forces and adult females of old but it is still being placed in the custodies of the church of today and we must take ownership of it and set it into plants so the fruits of our labour will come Forth out of the seeds of the crop. I have tried to cover some of the history of the great Roman Empire because I feel it is of import to see what was there and the power that was ripped off before the great power was in return handed over to the pontificate. Looking at portion of clip without looking at what came before that period is like looking at a picture but non caring whom the creative person is behind it. The Great Division
When looking into the great division that took topographic point in the Roman Empire 1 must first expression at the multiple patriarchs that were put into topographic point at Chalcedon. What is a patriarch? Harmonizing to Webster’s Dictionary a patriarch is. one of the biblical male parents of the human race or of the Hebrew people. a adult male who is father or laminitis. the oldest member or representative of a group. a venerable old adult male. a adult male who is caput of a patriarchate. any of the bishops of the antediluvian or Eastern Orthodox sees of Constantinople. Alexandria. Antioch. and Jerusalem or the antediluvian and Western see of Rome with authorization over other bishops. the caput of any of assorted Eastern churches. a Roman Catholic bishop next in rank to the Catholic Pope with strictly titular or with metropolitan legal power and a Mormon of the Melchizedek priesthood empowered to execute the regulations of the church and pronounce approvals within a interest or prescribed legal power. The authorization given to the archbishops made the most important bishops throughout all the imperium.
The archbishops were spread all throughout the land including Rome. Constantinople. Alexandria. Jerusalem and Antioch but the issue in this state of affairs was that the E contained four out of the five archbishops while the West merely had one archbishop. so at that place was non equal balance to both sides. A great division began to take topographic point between the two sides as clip passed and their political positions every bit good as their cultural positions began to switch and alterations began to take topographic point to divide the two sides. Throughout everything taking topographic point Rome took case in points over all other countries as the theological central office per say. There were many cultural differences throughout the two sides and one of the most impacting differences would be that of linguistic communication. Those of the West were largely talking the Grecian linguistic communication while those of the E were chiefly talking Latin. The Rise to Power
Todd Fletcher writes in his article for theologyfis. com about the rise of the Papacy in Rome and he says that. in 366 the Bishop of Rome was Damasus I. who was known as the laminitis of the Papacy in Rome. He had a high position of Rome and of his place as Patriarch of Rome. As stated earlier. Damasus believed that he had received direct authorization by Jesus Christ through Peter. and that every Bishop of Rome held “the keys of the land of Eden. ” This. in bend. made Rome the most influential metropolis in all of Christendom. His thoughts had an utmost impact on his replacements. so much so. that in AD 495 a synod of Rome hailed the Pope ( intending ‘father’ foremost used by Siricius ) as the “Vicar ( replacement ) of Christ. ” Around the clip of Damasus there was no strong leading in Rome. which merely served to leave even more power to the Roman Catholic Church. A century subsequently. there was no emperor in Western Empire. Leo I was the Pope who reigned from 440 to 461 AD. Leo I was known as “the most resolute. able. and successful.
The deficiency of leading created an issue because the jobs of the clip were so left up to the Catholic Church to work out and to make a program to repair the issues but at the same clip other Issues began to originate of others be aftering onslaughts on Rome so Leo make a determination to seek and alter the head of those who were be aftering onslaughts. Harmonizing to Phillip Smith’s Hagiographas. Leo took it upon himself to deter Attila from assailing Rome. “At the emperor’s want. Leo. accompanied by the Consul Avienus and the Prefect Trigetius. went in 452 to Upper Italy. and met Attila at Mincio in the locality of Mantua. obtaining from him the promise that he would retreat from Italy. ” Over clip the power and authorization set in topographic point for the pontificate and the church in those times due to the deficiency of leading. The pontificate had no pick but to step into that function and authorization and take full reins of all state of affairss and finally the church became a topographic point of protection for the people of Rome. The Reformation and the Loss of Power
In his article “The Papacy” Brother Rush writes that. The Bishop of Rome was one of the most of import Bishops of Western Europe up until the Reformation because of a figure of factors ; including being the metropolis which boasted of holding the first sufferer. ( Peter ) . Rome was the most esteemed metropolis in the Western Mediterranean and with the rubric of bishop of Rome came the prestigiousness that was so extremely associated with Rome. Another factor which led to the City of Rome being the most dominant City in Western Europe taking up until the Reformation was the fact that there had ne’er been a unorthodoxy that was publically implemented within the city’s gates. few metropoliss of this epoch could do this claim. taking to the leading place and rubric of leader of the Catholic Church within Western Europe. Throughout the rise of the pontificate the Roman people witnessed a figure of alterations throughout the Empires and in the terminal Italy was left in ruins but the Roman Catholic Church still proved to be a oasis for the people throughout this period of clip. The Papacy and its Branchings
To shut this paper I will concentrate on the positive branchings that took topographic point due to the pontificate. In my book the figure one positive branching would be impact the Roman church had of carry throughing the great commandment of taking the Gospel and acquiring it into manus s of the people in western Europe. I am certainly there were negative things we could concentrate on but this one
positive thing outweighs those any twenty-four hours in my book.
Smith. Phillip. “The History of the Christian Church During the First Ten Centuries. ” The Student’s Ecclesiastical History 1. no. 1 ( 1879 ) : 395.
Bush. Brother. “The Papacy. ” Give Your Witness 1 ( 2009 ) : 1.
Fletcher. Todd. “Papacy’s Power in Rome. ” Theology Fish 1. no. 1 ( 2011 ) : 1.
Webster. Noah. An American lexicon of the English linguistic communication. New York: Johnson Reprint Corp. . 1970.
Berthelot. Katell. “Philos Percept of the Roman Empire. ” Journal for the Study of Judaism 42. no. 2 ( 2011 ) : 166-187.