Pastor John,
Would it be a stretch to say Diocletian was the first Pope? In Cesar and Christ (pg 640-641), I’m interpreting Durant’s work as showing how Diocletian laid the imperial and civil framework that would act as the foundation for institutional Catholicism and the cult of apostolic succession. Firstly, he reinstituted the right of absolutism in the hands of imperial seat, probably the most successful of all Emperors to bypass the role of the Senate. From there, he elevated the personality of emperor as the “embodiment of Jupiter” … and “assumed a diadem – a broad white fillet set with pearls – and robes of silk and gold… Visitors were required to kneel and kiss the hem of his robe”. He encouraged such pomp and ceremony in order to transcend his power beyond this world in hope to win the test of time (the beginning of apostolic succession). As both God and King, he called himself dominus and established a social, political and religious contract between him and the Roman empire that the Catholic church would gradually assume over the next century.
Diocletian is a perfect example of blending of the gods and the proof that the concept of apostolic succession was invented by Rome to preserve the absolute right of power in the hand of the emperor.
Michael
============
Thanks, Michael for the question.
Much of Diocletian’s supremely arrogant attitude and some elements of his re-organization of the empire were adopted later by leaders of the Catholic Church, but I think it is too much to call him the first Pope. The fact that Popes seemed like him is due, not to him trying to be Pope-like, but to Popes (when they came on the scene some years later) wanting to be like him, in earthly glory and authority.
I am working on the Iron Kingdom now, when I can, so that the truth of the matter may be known. Thank you for your prayers and participation in this holy work!
Pastor John