SnowyMacie
Well-Known Member
- Apr 12, 2011
- 17,007
- 6,087
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
primacy was never moved because Old Rome at the time never lost status. the only one who gained was Constantinople, which miffed Alexandria. however, since no bishop has ever had authority over his brother bishops, it was never a theological issue. it is right and valid because it helps maintain good order.
I may have described it poorly. The way the Orthodox preist described it to me is that the Bishop of Rome was considered to be the first amoung equals because that was the capital of the Roman Empire, when the captial moved to Constantinople (may have still been Byzatium at the time) the Bishop there became the first among equals. Rome, however, I believe he said, never acknowledged this.
When I said "we" I didn't necessarily mean to include myself but I know there're many folks in this forum who know the issues and history and evidence a lot better than me. I know because it was an issue for me when I was an inquirer and, apart from other reading, back in the day I paid attention to some debate threads between Orthodox and Catholics, and long story short, the Orthodox convinced me and the other guys didn't. So if you want to chat about it here or in a separate thread, feel free.
I was taught in high school a blantatly wrong idea: Eastern Orthodoxy broke off of Rome (no I didn't attend Catholic school). When I took Western Civ in college, it was just "They disagreed about X, Y, and Z". After I started studying Church history and talking to Catholics and Orthodox, it seemed like "he said, she said", and kind of left me in a place of not knowing who's version of history correct when it comes to the Great Schism.
Have you read the letters of St Cyprian of Carthage?
He considered the bishop of Rome to be on equal footing with his own bishopric, gave advice to the bishop of Rome, and was even referred to by the clergy at Rome as "pope" at a time when they were without a bishop.
His letters definitely show much respect to the bishop of Rome because at that time, being crowned bishop of Rome meant martyrdom within a short period of time. Thus those who accepted the role were exemplary Christians in every way, unfortunately it did not continue to be the case after Rome ceased to be a persecuted Church.
Interesting, I may have to read those letters.
Upvote
0