[quote="AlexPetrosPio, post:3, topic:305994"]
"Pope" is an archaic Latin? word meaning "papa."
It's originally from Greek, though the Latin word that is derived from it is the same.
[quote="Polycarp1, post:5, topic:305994"]
During the early church when the Orthodox (eastern and oriental) and Catholic church were still one church.Each leader of the 5 ancient sees had a title Constonople,Antioch,Jeruselum all beared the title patariach alone.However the Roman church used bishop of rome and the Alexandrian (coptic) used patarich and pope in conjuction,
The title "Pope" was first used in reference to HH Pope St. Heraclas of Alexandria, the thirteenth occupant of the See of St Mark, in the third century. Interestingly enough, this came in a letter from the then-current Bishop of Rome, Dionysius. By contrast, "Pope" was not used as a title in reference to the Bishop of Rome specifically until the 11th century.
The leader of the Catholic church is the succesor of st.peter and the leader of the Coptic orthodox church is the succeser of st.mark.and since the orthodox church (eastern and oriental) do not believe St.Peter had authority over the other apostles they do not belive he has authority over the other apsotolic churches which are the orthodox churches
It is important to note, however, that we do commemorate Sts. Peter and Paul as the chief apostles (these are traditionally paired together in our hymnology, as they ministered together; see, for instance this fraction prayer for the Apostles, or the fraction for the apostles listed here), and St. Peter especially as the teacher of St. Mark (as is recorded in the scripture), and recognize in the Syriac Orthodox Church currently headed by HH Mor Ignatius Zakka I Iwas an equal successor to St. Peter as in Rome, as Antioch is also a Petrine See. So it is not as though we stick to St. Mark only, although he is obviously very highly esteemed in the Egyptian Church, for obvious reasons. :)
[quote="ConstantineTG, post:11, topic:305994"]
There was a joint declaration of a common Christology a few years back.
Relations have really soured in recent years, I'm sad to say, as a result of what can be seen as Rome's somewhat liberal attitude toward the Nestorians and other matters (formal talks between the CoE and the Copts ended in 1996 when the Coptic synod refused to sign an agreed statement that had been hashed out in 1995 at the monastery of St. Bishoy after talks between the two had taken place there). While there are some very welcome signs of an improvement in relations, largely coming out of talks between HG Bishop Angaelos and his Roman Catholic equivalent as part of the the Catholic-Oriental Orthodox Forum in the UK (you can read the press release on their latest activity here), there is a lot of history that indicates that it will be an uphill climb if we want to make real progress in ecumenical relations (and as to "reunion", honestly, forget about it; sorry to sound negative, but it's better not to enter any future talks with that as an immediate goal, as that will only lead to disappointment...a more realistic goal is better).