🎙️ New to streaming or looking to level up? Check out StreamYard and get $10 discount! 😍 https://streamyard.com/pal/d/4596156377333760

This presentation argues that contemporary Eastern Orthodox apologists remain bound by the consistent position of their post-schism theologians, saints, and councils: the primacy of the Apostolic See of Rome in the first millennium was NEITHER divinely instituted by Christ in St. Peter NOR derived from succession to the pastoral prerogatives conferred upon him for the universal Church. RATHER, the enduring Byzantine view held that Elder Rome’s precedence arose through historical development, as the city’s status as imperial capital prompted the bishops, NOT THE APOSTLES, to accord it a distinctive place and certain (very limited) ecclesiastical prerogatives.

This distinction bears directly on current debate.

Some Orthodox writers—here termed Orthodox-Papalists—seek to accommodate a divinely grounded Petrine primacy for Rome, albeit one of lesser scope and authority than that defined at Vatican I (even just a few degrees shorter!), in order to align more readily with the first-millennium record that has become more readily accessible for English readers in recent history. The argument of the presentation is that such accommodation to a divinely instituted Roman papacy is unavailable to the Orthodox. Continuity with the Byzantine objections, unbroken from the eleventh-century schism onward, requires the defense of the historical, non-Petrine account of Roman primacy, and not a sliver of room should be given for any alternatives.