….some questions on Eastern Orthodoxy.I know that they’re pretty much the same as us Catholics minus a few things like the Filioque and accepting the Primacy of Peter.
The Orthodox Churches have valid Holy Orders, the Mass and the Sacraments. Their errors include the denial of both the primacy and infallibility of the Vicar of Christ. That bishops can teach all truth apart from the Supreme Vicar of Christ is an absurdity which allows the confusion and error which has produced the feeling that primacy and infallibility can be ignored when it suits – such as with the case of the Orthodox Churches over the infallible teaching against contraception, denial of the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, and the permission of divorce and remarriage.
However, I have heard that originally, there were five bishops, including the Bishop of Rome, that all ruled with equal power. The Bishop of Rome was considered the greatest among equals.
St. James seems to have been designated as the future Bishop of Jerusalem, but there is no indication that Jerusalem itself had been designated as the “chief See”. At the Council, St. Peter manifested his superior authority by speaking first, giving his decision and declaring that, by means of a vision, the course to be adopted had been indicated to him by God. His verdict did not need the approval of the assembly, and it left no room for discussion. “All held their peace” once Peter had spoken (Acts, 15:11).
Paul made sure that his ministry to the gentiles was recognised by Peter (Gal 1:I8).
Tradition shows Pope St Clement exercising his primacy in about 96, on a matter of schism in the Church of Corinth. Of the same generation as Saints Peter and Paul and when St John the Apostle was probably still living in Ephesus, Pope Clement wrote as one commanding to the Church of Corinth in Greece: “If any disobey what He (Christ) says through us, let them know that they will be involved in no small offence and danger, but we shall be innocent of this sin.” (I Clem. ad Cor. 59,1).