I have been attempting a compromise solution between Catholic and Orthodox ecclesiology, and I believe I may have found one.
The compromise is based upon what I understand to be North African ecclesiology, largely Cyprian, although some Augustine is also considered. The benefit I see in this approach is the unique position of the North Africans in that their approach to the Scriptural witness is Western, and so is in agreement with Rome on matters of interpretation and the historical witness of Roman primacy, while at the same time addressing similar concerns as the east in regard to the equality of bishops and conciliarism.
The North African ecclesiology is premised upon the Petrine foundation of the Church.1 Peter is the rock of Matthew 16:18 and on Peter Christ builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep (John 21:17).2 However, the passage speaks not merely to the prestige of the Roman see, but to the honor of all bishops.3 The form of this authority is the power to bind and loose and the remittance and retention of sins, as well as the administration of the sacramental life of the Church.4
While the other apostles were of equal power and authority with Peter, by means of Christ's commission and Holy Spirit (John 20:21-23)5, yet so as to maintain order, this authority finds it's source in Peter.6 The Throne of Peter is the uniting power of the episcopate (established by and on Christ) and is shared by all of the bishops. While the source of this power finds its locus in the bishop of Rome as the See of Peter par excellence,7 yet all bishops are equal in all aspects of honor and authority to the bishop of Rome.8 For even as the Holy Spirit and the Son find their source in the monarchy of the Father, and yet are one with the Father and are equal in power and honor, so too are the bishops, for while they are many, yet they are one,9 for all bishops sit upon the Throne of Peter, but the Throne of Peter is one.10 From this source proceeds all of the episcopate, in a partnership of honor and power, and by it the episcopate is one and undivided.
Out of this one episcopate, we can see the development of two aspects of the shared Petrine office that bishops partake of. These two aspects are episcopal privilege and episcopal duty. In matters that do not touch upon bonds of concord and the sacramental unity of the Church, the bishop should have freedom to exercise their pastoral office over the People of God assigned to them.11 Episcopal duty is the preservation of those bonds of communion and sacramental unity of the Church,12 and thus episcopal privilege ends where it infringes upon episcopal duty.13 This duty is extended not only to the communion between bishops,14 but also on a local level between a bishop and his presbyters and deacons, and indeed between all of the people of God, particularly those the bishop has pastoral responsibility for.15
From the principle of a single episcopate proceeds also the principle of the Church being one,16 even as the Father is the source of the Son and the Holy Spirit, yet the divine essence is one. The Church is founded upon the bishops and is controlled by the same.17 They are the Church who are united to their priest, the flock which adheres to its pastor. Thus, the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop, and whoever is not with the bishop is not in the Church. The Church is catholic and one. It is not divided nor can it be dissected, but is connected and bound together by the coherence of it's bishops with one another.18
This locus of unity among the episcopate, the bishop of Rome, must not operate with insolence or arrogantly assume authority for himself over his fellow bishops.19 To operate in resistance to this partnership of bishops is to cut himself off from the unity of love and estrange himself from his brethren, making him a rebel against the sacrament and the faith of the Church.20 Instead, the bishop of Rome must operate in conjunction with the college of bishops and not in resistance to the councillar authority of the episcopate. Safety is found in the consent of the universal Church, whose voice is found started in regional councils and established in plenary councils of the Catholic Church under the direction of our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ.21
In the face of unrepentant Papal abuse, either in practice or doctrine, and where this had been brought to his attention by responsible members of the hierarchy (just as St. Paul reproved St. Peter to his face), a regional council would call upon the episcopate requesting a general council in order to hear its petition and for redress of grievances. Such a council would then weigh the petition and render verdict. In the case where judgement is passed against a Pope, it would be declared that the Roman See was vacant and a new bishop would be selected.
The compromise is based upon what I understand to be North African ecclesiology, largely Cyprian, although some Augustine is also considered. The benefit I see in this approach is the unique position of the North Africans in that their approach to the Scriptural witness is Western, and so is in agreement with Rome on matters of interpretation and the historical witness of Roman primacy, while at the same time addressing similar concerns as the east in regard to the equality of bishops and conciliarism.
The North African ecclesiology is premised upon the Petrine foundation of the Church.1 Peter is the rock of Matthew 16:18 and on Peter Christ builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep (John 21:17).2 However, the passage speaks not merely to the prestige of the Roman see, but to the honor of all bishops.3 The form of this authority is the power to bind and loose and the remittance and retention of sins, as well as the administration of the sacramental life of the Church.4
While the other apostles were of equal power and authority with Peter, by means of Christ's commission and Holy Spirit (John 20:21-23)5, yet so as to maintain order, this authority finds it's source in Peter.6 The Throne of Peter is the uniting power of the episcopate (established by and on Christ) and is shared by all of the bishops. While the source of this power finds its locus in the bishop of Rome as the See of Peter par excellence,7 yet all bishops are equal in all aspects of honor and authority to the bishop of Rome.8 For even as the Holy Spirit and the Son find their source in the monarchy of the Father, and yet are one with the Father and are equal in power and honor, so too are the bishops, for while they are many, yet they are one,9 for all bishops sit upon the Throne of Peter, but the Throne of Peter is one.10 From this source proceeds all of the episcopate, in a partnership of honor and power, and by it the episcopate is one and undivided.
Out of this one episcopate, we can see the development of two aspects of the shared Petrine office that bishops partake of. These two aspects are episcopal privilege and episcopal duty. In matters that do not touch upon bonds of concord and the sacramental unity of the Church, the bishop should have freedom to exercise their pastoral office over the People of God assigned to them.11 Episcopal duty is the preservation of those bonds of communion and sacramental unity of the Church,12 and thus episcopal privilege ends where it infringes upon episcopal duty.13 This duty is extended not only to the communion between bishops,14 but also on a local level between a bishop and his presbyters and deacons, and indeed between all of the people of God, particularly those the bishop has pastoral responsibility for.15
From the principle of a single episcopate proceeds also the principle of the Church being one,16 even as the Father is the source of the Son and the Holy Spirit, yet the divine essence is one. The Church is founded upon the bishops and is controlled by the same.17 They are the Church who are united to their priest, the flock which adheres to its pastor. Thus, the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop, and whoever is not with the bishop is not in the Church. The Church is catholic and one. It is not divided nor can it be dissected, but is connected and bound together by the coherence of it's bishops with one another.18
This locus of unity among the episcopate, the bishop of Rome, must not operate with insolence or arrogantly assume authority for himself over his fellow bishops.19 To operate in resistance to this partnership of bishops is to cut himself off from the unity of love and estrange himself from his brethren, making him a rebel against the sacrament and the faith of the Church.20 Instead, the bishop of Rome must operate in conjunction with the college of bishops and not in resistance to the councillar authority of the episcopate. Safety is found in the consent of the universal Church, whose voice is found started in regional councils and established in plenary councils of the Catholic Church under the direction of our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ.21
In the face of unrepentant Papal abuse, either in practice or doctrine, and where this had been brought to his attention by responsible members of the hierarchy (just as St. Paul reproved St. Peter to his face), a regional council would call upon the episcopate requesting a general council in order to hear its petition and for redress of grievances. Such a council would then weigh the petition and render verdict. In the case where judgement is passed against a Pope, it would be declared that the Roman See was vacant and a new bishop would be selected.
Not then, not now, not EVER. 
