New Pope Takes on 8 Official Titles, But Pope's Not One

This an article from five years ago when Francis was elected Pope. I'm not posting it as news, but because it shows what Catholics of Faith are up against, both in the secular world and in the Church. The ignorance on the part of the secular media coupled with the heresy and ignorance of Catholic 'experts' is appalling! Remember, for many people this article may have been the only thing they've ever learned regarding the tiles of the Holy Father.

I have highlighted a few passages, but my comments are in parentheses and initialled JW.

From NBC News


By Scott Ross

Pope Francis I will be taking on the awesome responsibility of leading a church with more than 1 billion followers, a job that comes with eight official titles — none of them "Pope."

To hear Dr. Terrence W. Tilley, Chair of the Theology Department at Fordham University, tell it, calling the pope "pope" is a little like calling your CEO "chief."

"'Pope' comes from the Italian 'papa,'" explains Tilley. "It's actually a colloquial term rather than a formal term. In America, we often use the phrase, especially the bishops — 'Holy Father,' 'Sancta Papa,' — which is where you get 'Pope.'" (So far, very good!-JW)

The pope's proper title, according to the Vatican's website, is Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Sovereign of the State of Vatican City, Servant of the Servants of God.

What does it all mean?

Bishop of Rome

"Bishop" comes from the Greek "episcopas," meaning "overseer," and Rome of course being HQ for the Catholic Church. The term "pope," or "papa," didn’t emerge until later.

St. Peter is considered by many to be the first Bishop of Rome, but Father Raymond Schroth of America Magazine says there is a fair amount of doubt surrounding that claim.

"Raymond Brown was the best scripture scholar we had, and he's written several things on this. (He) said it would be a mistake to say that Peter was the first pope, as if he were the founder of the church. That's an exaggeration. The evidence for Peter's presence in Rome is not airtight — that's a nice way of putting it. They have a tomb under St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, where it's believed that St. Peter is buried. But, you know, it took 'em a long time to find the grave," says Schroth with a laugh.

(This from the Church! Of course, Raymond Brown was a Sulpician 'Bible scholar'. I put Bible scholar in inverted commas because he was among the first Catholics to adopt the modernist, heretical historical-critical method of attacking the Truth of the Inspired Scripture. He taught at Union Theological Seminary, a protestant school which has long been known as a bastion of progressive Christian scholarship [In other words modernist heresy with a protestant slant], and was the birthplace of the Black theology and Womanist Theology, whatever the hell they are! He not only questioned the Papacy of St Peter, which is an Infallibly defined Dogma of the Church, but questioned whether the Virgin Birth could be 'historically proven'.

And since Fr Schroth is at 'America Magazine, I would assume he's a Jesuit, which is probably all I need to say about him. However, I do want to address this little gem, 'But, you know, it took 'em a long time to find the grave," says Schroth with a laugh.' It would seem to me that if the Church had wanted to honour St Peter's grave, they would have just made up a storey and said 'There it is!', instead of waiting until the 20th century to find it. Oh, and notice that he laughs as he's trying to denigrate the Papal Office.-JW)

Vicar of Jesus Christ, aka Vicar of Christ

"A less formal title that is rooted in his primacy," says Tilley. "That is, his political headship of the universal church. So a vicar would be something like a vice regent. I believe it is a medieval or early modern title."

(Dr Tilley needs to study a bit of history. The Title 'Vicar of Christ' was first used of Pope St Gelasius I, who reigned at the very end of the fifth century. Whilst its use was at first irregular, by the 13th century it was one of the regular titles of the Bishop of Rome, hardly 'early modern'!

And it has nothing to do with the 'political headship of the universal church (sic). It is because he acts on earth for the Head of the Church, Our Saviour Jesus Christ-JW)

Successor of the Prince of the Apostles

Another direct reference to St. Peter, who was deemed Prince of the Apostles on the strength of Jesus declaring in Matthew 16:18, "That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church." Another dubious claim, according to Schroth.

"Historically, this is a stretch, in the sense that the evidence is not there that Peter was the first leader of the church," says Schroth. "If you said to Peter, if you were to flash back in history and say, 'Are you the pope?,' he wouldn’t know what you were talking about. That term 'pope' did not come along for another couple hundred of years.

"This is a baroque title. It's one of those 'let's puff up the pope' titles," concedes Tilley.

(Another modernist attack on the Papal Office. It's in Holy Scripture, ' 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.' So the Church, speaking with the Infallibility that Our Blessed Lord and Redeemer gave her in interpreting Scripture is wrong?-JW)

Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church

The word "pontiff" comes from the Latin "pontifex," meaning "bridge-builder." "Pontifex maximus" was the great bridge-builder of ancient Rome, a title held by the likes of Julius Caesar. Tilley believes the title was assumed by the Bishop of Rome post-Reformation, as an assertion of his "juridical and communicative status."

"More hierarchical jargon that keeps emphasizing that he's the number one guy," says Schroth. "What I think is implied (by Universal) is that this includes the Greek Catholic Church — not the Orthodox — as well as the Roman Catholic. They don’t call themselves Roman Catholics, but they are Catholics, and they acknowledge the sovereignty of the Bishop of Rome... It's power talk."

(Even here, Dr Tilley can't get his facts straight. Given that the title was used in the 14th century and the protestant Deformation (sic!) didn't begin until the early 16th century, he's off again!

And 'Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church' means exactly that. Whilst Dr Tilley doesn't seem to claim to be a historian, one might think that as a theology professor, he might be at least a bit familiar with the First 

Œcumenical Council of the Vatican. Blessed Pius IX, in his capacity as Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church ordered the Orthodox Bishops to attend the Council. They did not obey.-JW)

Primate of Italy

Nothing to do with monkeys. Like with any massive bureaucracy, the Catholic Church has layer upon layer of jurisdictions, and this title affirms the pope's status among the other bishops in his home country.

"A 'primate' is the head — or the 'primus,' the first one — of a region of the world. So the 'primate of Italy' says that he is the first in line of the Italian bishops," says Tilley. "As primate of Italy, he is the number one bishop of Italy... So when the Italian cardinals meet, he would be in charge of the cardinals."

(First notice the 'massive bureaucracy'. And all this time I thought the Church was a family, with God as our Father and Blessed Mary as our Mother, and the Pope acting as a surrogate or 'vicar' [see above] in their place. Isn't that why we call him 'Papa'? 

And Dr Tilley doesn't seem to know what a Cardinal is. There are no 'Italian Cardinals'. There are Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, each with a Titular Church within the Diocese of Rome. His Holiness is indeed the number one Bishop in Italy, just as there are primates in many other countries, just as His Eminence Philippe, Cardinal Barbarin, Archbishop of Lyons, is Primate of the Gauls in France.

And to say that 'A 'primate' is the head — or the 'primus,' the first one — of a region of the world', is just a wee bit misleading. I don't think most people think of Italy as a 'region of the world'. For instance, the small country of Ireland has two primates. The Archbishop of Dublin is Primate of Ireland, and the Archbishop of Armagh is Primate of All Ireland. The same was true before the Deformation in England [and still is in the Anglican Church of England]. The Archbishop of York was Primate of England and the Archbishop of Canterbury was Primate of All England. I will grant him the Archbishop of Quebec, Primate of Canada, since Canada could be considered a 'region of the world', and in Sweden before the Deformation, the Archbishop of Lund was Primate of Scandinavia, another 'region'.-JW)

Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province 

Yet another layer. The universal church is divided into regions, for which there are primates, and then the diocese, for which there is the "archbishop and metropolitan" (in this instance "metropolitan" is a noun, not an adjective) — think Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York.

(I'm assuming this stupidity is from the author of the article, not one of his Catholic 'experts'! It would come as a great surprise to my Bishop, His Excellency James Conley, that he is 'Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Diocese of Lincoln'! It also might be a bit upsetting to His Excellency George Lucas, Archbishop of Omaha and Metropolitan of the Province of Omaha, whose suffragan my Bishop is.-JW

Sovereign of the State of Vatican City

"He's a king! He's a king of 29 acres," says Tilley. "In previous centuries, the pope was the sovereign of the papal states, so they had political jurisdiction over much of central Italy."

Following the unification of Italy in 1870, Vatican City's status — "The Roman Question" — was up in the air until the Lateran Treaty of 1929 established it as a sovereign state within Benito Mussolini's Italy.

(Actually fairly accurate. When the Freemasonic Italian Kingdom lay siege to Rome in their successful attempt to destroy the Papal States, just before Blessed Pope Pius IX signalled his surrender, he reviewed his troops. As they stood at attention, they shouted, 'Long Live Pius IX, Pontiff and King!' (My readers might be interested in Chevalier Charles Coulombe's book, The Pope's Legion: The Multinational Fighting Force that Defended the Vatican. [If you are moved to buy this book, I will receive a small commission at no additional cost to you.])

However, Dr Tilley omits the reason that the Pope was 'King' over the Papal States. It was necessary for the independence of the Church, so that the Pope was not a pawn of whichever King in whose territory he lived. The Church had seen what that led to in Constantinople with the Patriarch under the Eastern Roman Empire (and later the Ottomans and still going on under the jihadists in the Republic of Turkey), and in Moscow under the Tsars.-JW)

Servant of the Servants of God

From the Latin "Servus servorum Dei" and rooted in Matthew 20:26-27, which says, "whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant."

"That's a great title, because it's the most biblical — it's probably the only biblical one," says Schroth. "At the Last Supper, Jesus gets down on his knees and washes the feet of the 12. He's saying, 'I'm trying to show you something: you're servants.' And there are plenty of these little incidents in the Gospels.

"The apostles think this is a power trip. They think Jesus is going to be made king or messiah or have some earthly power. And they want jobs in the administration. One guy sends his mother, the mother of James and John, and she says to Jesus, 'Take care of my boys when you come into power.' And he says, 'We'll see how well they take persecution.' The apostles are not perfect in that they have certain ambitions, and he's trying, up to the very end, to teach them to get over it."

(Surprisingly, I have no complaints about this.-JW)