The Eastern Orthodox Church is opposed to the Catholic dogma of papal supremacy. While not denying that primacy does exist for the Bishop of Rome, Eastern Orthodox Christians argue that the tradition of Rome's primacy in the Early Church was not equivalent to the current doctrine of supremacy.
Eastern Orthodox understanding of Catholicity
The test of authentic catholicity is adherence to the authority of the Church's Holy Tradition, and then to the witness of Sacred "Scripture", which is itself a product of the Church's aforementioned Holy Tradition. It is not defined by adherence to any particular see. It is the position of the Eastern Orthodox Church that it has never accepted the pope as de jure leader of the entire church. All bishops are equal "as Peter", therefore every church under every bishop (consecrated in apostolic succession) is fully complete (the original meaning of catholic).
Referring to Ignatius of Antioch,Epistle to the Smyrnaeans - Chapter VIII.-Let Nothing Be Done Without the Bishop. Carlton says:
The church is in the image of the TrinityLossky, V., (2002) The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, (St Vladimirs Seminary Press; Crestwood, NY), p.176 and reflects the reality of the incarnation.
Any changes to the understanding of the church would reflect a change in the understanding of the Trinity.
Eastern Orthodox rebuttal of Catholic arguments
It is the position of Orthodox Christianity that Roman Catholic arguments in support of the teaching have relied on proofs from Fathers that have either been misinterpreted or so taken out of context as to misrepresent their true intent. It is the position of Orthodox Christianity that a closer examination of those supposed supports would have the effect of either not supporting the argument or have the opposite effect of supporting the counter-argument.
Apostolic Throne
Athanasius is used as a witness for papal primacy on numerous Catholic apologist sites.
Whelton however says that Athanasius does not use the definite article (the) in the text.Whelton, M., (2006) Popes and Patriarchs: An Orthodox Perspective on Roman Catholic Claims, (Concillar Press; Ben Lomond, CA), pp63-4.
Rome is an Apostolic throne, not the Apostolic throne.
Pope Leo XIII
Augustine
Whelton goes on to say that for Augustine there is not one Apostolic See, but many:
Ignatius of Antioch
For Ignatius each church under a bishop is complete – the original meaning of "catholic". For Ignatius the church is a world-wide unity of many communities. Each has at its center a bishop "who draws together the local community in the Eucharistic celebration."Empie, P. C., & Murphy, T. A., (1974) Papal Primacy and the Universal Church: Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue V (Augsburg Publishing House; Minneapolis, MN) p47. This then is the unity of the church – each church united to its bishop – each of these churches united to each other. There is no evidence of him accepting a single supreme bishop-of-bishops as the bishop's authority is localised to a particular church.Srawley, J. H., (1910) The epistles of St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, Volume 1, (Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge; London), p. 34 C. Carlton sums up Ignatius's view of the bishop's role in the Church this way:
Ignatius sets out what he believes consists of the church in an epistle to the Trallians:
There is no reference to another tier above bishop. For Ignatius, the bishop is supreme, not the bishop because he is in communion with the bishop in Rome."It is manifest, therefore, that we should look upon the bishop even as we would look upon the Lord Himself." Ignatius, Epistle to the Ephesians - Chapter VI - Have respect to the bishop as to Christ Himself."He who honors the bishop has been honored by God; he who does anything without the knowledge of the bishop, does [in reality] serve the devil." Ignatius Epistle to the Smyrneans - Chapter IX.—Honour the bishop."As therefore the Lord does nothing without the Father, for says He, "I can of mine own self do nothing," so do ye, neither presbyter, nor deacon, nor layman, do anything without the bishop" Ignatius Epistle to the Magnesians - Chapter VII —Do nothing without the bishop and presbyters."For your justly-renowned presbytery, being worthy of God, is fitted as exactly to the bishop as the strings are to the harp." IgnatiusEpistle to the Ephesians – Chapter IV – the same continued."And do ye also reverence your bishop as Christ Himself, according as the blessed apostles have enjoined you. He that is within the altar is pure, wherefore also he is obedient to the bishop and presbyters: but he that is without is one that does anything apart from the bishop, the presbyters, and the deacons. Such a person is defiled in his conscience, and is worse than an infidel. For what is the bishop but one who beyond all others possesses all power and authority, so far as it is possible for a man to possess it who according to his ability has been made an imitator of the Christ of God?" Ignatius Epistle to the Trallians. Chapter VII.— The same continued.
Thus when he writes to Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna, he states that God is Polycarp’s bishop, implying that there is no intermediary between the local bishop and God.Epistle to Polycarp. "Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to Polycarp, Bishop of the Church of the Smyrnæans, or rather, who has, as his own bishop, God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ: [wishes] abundance of happiness"
John Chrysostom referred to Ignatius of Antioch as a "teacher equivalent to Peter".Homilies on S. Ignatius and S. Babylas – Eulogy "... when Peter was about to depart from here, the grace of the Spirit introduced another teacher equivalent to Peter ..." Eulogy quoted in Abbé Guettée (1866).The Papacy: Its Historic Origin and Primitive Relations with the Eastern Churches, (Minos Publishing Co; NY), p165.
Letter to the Romans Ignatius' Epistle to the Romans is used by Catholic apologists to suggest Roman primacy.Ray, S. K., (1999) Upon this rock: St. Peter and the primacy of Rome in scripture and the early church, (Ignatius Press; San Francisco), p. 72 In particular his opening remarks:
J.H. Srawley concedes that the Roman church presides but argues that it is unclear as to what area the act of presiding ("presides in the place of the region of the Romans" and "presides over love") refers to. He argues that the act of presiding may be simply of those churches in the region of the Romans, that is, those in Italy.Srawley, J. H., (1919), The Epistles of St Ignatius (The Macmillan Company; NY), p. 70
Tome of Leo Often cited as a proof of Papal SupremacyRay, S. K., (1999) Upon this rock: St. Peter and the primacy of Rome in scripture and the early church, (Ignatius Press; San Francisco) p. 235The Authority of the Pope: Part II at Catholic AnswersIS THE ORTHODOX CHURCH APOSTOLIC ? Catholic Apologetics is the Tome of Leo which is a letter sent by Pope Leo to the Fourth Ecumenical Council, Chalcedon in 451. It in part seems to suggest that Leo speaks with the authority of Peter. It is the position of Orthodox Christianity that the approval of the Tome is simply to state a unity of faith, not only of the pope but other churchmen as well. Before the Tome of Leo was presented to the Council, it was submitted to a committee headed by Patriarch St. Anatolius of Constantinople for study. The committee compared the Tome of Leo to the 12 Anathemas of St. Cyril of Alexandria against Nestorius and declared the Tome orthodox. It was then presented to the council for approval.
However it is not just Leo's teaching that is the teaching of the Apostle, but Cyril's teaching as well. Both teach as Peter. The same language was used following the reading of Cyril's letter at the council."And when these letters had been read, the most reverend bishops cried out: We all so believe: Pope Leo thus believes: anathema to him who divides and to him who confounds: this is the faith of Archbishop Leo: Leo thus believes: Leo and Anatolius so believe: we all thus believe. As Cyril so believe we, all of us: eternal be the memory of Cyril: as the epistles of Cyril teach such is our mind, such has been our faith: such is our faith: this is the mind of Archbishop Leo, so he believes, so he has written. Extracts from the Acts. Session II. (Continued). (L. and C., Conc., Tom. IV., col. 343.) The language of the council is simply to reinforce that all believe.Whelton, M., (2006) Popes and Patriarchs: An Orthodox Perspective on Roman Catholic Claims, (Concillar Press; Ben Lomond, CA). pp. 85ff At the Third Ecumenical Council Pope Celestine and Cyril were compared to Paul."And all the most reverend bishops at the same time cried out. This is a just judgment. To Cœlestine, a new Paul! To Cyril a new Paul! To Cœlestine the guardian of the faith! To Cœlestine of one mind with the synod! To Cœlestine the whole Synod offers its thanks! One Cœlestine! One Cyril! One faith of the Synod! One faith of the world!"Extracts from the Acts. Session II.(Labbe and Cossart, Concilia, Tom. III., col. 617.)
John Chrysostom
Another apparent witness for supremacy claims is John Chrysostom. This evidence is supposed to be based on an incident when he faced exile and he appealed to the pope for help. When he was to be exiled he appealed to the pope for help, as well as two other western prelates; Venerius of Milan and Chromatius of Aquileia. He appealed to all three in the same terms rather than viewing the pope as leader.Stephens, W. R. W., (2005)Saint Chrysostom: His Life and Times, (Elibron Classics), pp. 349-50
In 2007 Pope Benedict XVI also spoke of this:
Historian J. N. D Kelly wrote:
The pope took up the cause of John Chrysostom, convoking a western synod to investigate the matter.Palladius, (1985) Dialogue on the Life of John Chrysostom (Newman Press; NY) p.24 They found in favor of John Chrysostom and sent delegates to Constantinople but these were ignored and sent back after only three months.Ibid. pp. 29–30. The pope's findings in support of John Chrysostom were not viewed as serious enough to annul John Chrysostom's exile.
It must also be remembered that he took his vows from Meletius (whom we noted earlier was not in communion with Rome). He accepted as an authority men not in communion with Rome. After Meletius died John Chrysostom accepted Flavian as his bishopSocrates Scholasticus The Ecclesiastical History Book V.9 – another person not in communion with Rome.Puller, F. W., (1893),The Primitive Saints and the See of Rome, (Longmans, Green & Co; NY), p. 266 John Chrysostom spent much of his life not in communion with Rome.
Other texts are used to allege he supported Roman primacy. John Chrysostom sometimes ascribes to Peter greatness.
This would seem to indicate that Chrysostom taught that Peter was the supreme ruler over the "brethren". He goes on to ascribe Peter as the "teacher of the world"."And if any should say 'How then did James receive the chair at Jerusalem?' I would make this reply, that He appointed Peter teacher not of the chair, but of the world ... And this He did to withdraw them (Peter and John) from their unseasonable sympathy for each other; for since they were about to receive the charge of the world, it was necessary that they should no longer be closely associated together." John Chrysostom Ibid.
However, according to Abbé Guettée on other occasions John Chrysostom ascribes the same titles to others:Abbé Guettée (1866). The Papacy: Its Historic Origin and Primitive Relations with the Eastern Churches, (Minos Publishing Co; NY), pp. 156ff.