1,942
edits
Changes
→Rise of Rome: fixing links
John Binns writes that, after the fall and destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, the natural leading centres of the Church were Antioch and Alexandria. Alexandria had been assisted by Mark <ref>John Binns, ''An Introduction to the Christian Orthodox Churches'', Cambridge University Press, UK, 2002, p144</ref>, one of the [[Seventy Apostles]]. Antioch had attracted Peter and Paul and Barnabas, plus others of the Seventy. Antioch was the base from which Paul made his missionary journeys to the pagans. <ref>Acts 11:19-26, Acts 12:24-25, Acts 13:1-3, Acts 14:24-28, Acts 15:1-2, Acts 15:22-40, Acts 18:22-23, Acts 19:21-22, Gal 2:11-14</ref>. The [[Church of Antioch]] sent the apostles Peter and Paul to Rome to assist the fledgling church there in its growth, and because Rome was the capital of the [[Roman Empire]]. Antioch regarded Peter as its first bishop <ref>John Binns, ''An Introduction to the Christian Orthodox Churches'', Cambridge University Press, UK, 2002, p144</ref>.
Will Durant writes that, after Jerusalem, the church of Rome naturally became the primary church, the capital of Christianity.<ref name="CC">[[Will Durant|Durant, Will]]. ''Caesar and Christ''. New York: Simon and Schuster. 1972</ref> Rome had an early and significant Christian population.<ref name="CC"/> It was closely identified with the [[Apostle Paul|Paul of Tarsus|Apostle Paul]], who preached<ref>{{bibleverse||Acts|28:17-31}}</ref> and was [[martyr]]ed there, and the [[Saint Peter|Apostle Peter]], who was a martyr there as well. The Eastern Orthodox liturgy calls Peter and Paul "the wisest Apostles and their princes" and "the radiant ornaments of Rome".<ref>[http://www.anastasis.org.uk/29_june.htm Great Vespers of 29 June]</ref><ref>[http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/menaia.htm#_Toc102863625 Menaion, 29 June]</ref> Peter is seen as founder of the Church in Rome,<ref>[http://www.pittsburgh.goarch.org/illuminator/illum-2004-dec.pdf The Illuminator, The Newspaper of the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh, Oct.-Dec. 2004, p.7]</ref> and the bishops of Rome as his successors.<ref>[http://www.orthodox.net/saints/70apostles.html "Linus was bishop of Rome after the holy apostle Peter"]</ref><ref>[[Pope Benedict XVI]] is "the 265th successor of the St Peter" ([http://www.archons.org/pdf/2007/2007_Annual_Archon_Report.pdf Order of Saint Andrew the Apostle, 2007 Annual Report to His All Holiness Bartholomew]</ref> While the Eastern cities of Alexandria and Antioch produced theological works, the bishops of Rome focused on what Romans admittedly did best: administration.<ref name="CC"/>
Leading Orthodox theologian, Father [[Thomas Hopko]] has written: "The church of Rome held a special place of honor among the earliest Christian churches. It was first among the communities that recognized each other as catholic churches holding the orthodox faith concerning God's Gospel in Jesus. According to St Ignatius, the bishop of Antioch who died a martyr's death in Rome around the year 110, 'the church which presides in the territories of the Romans' was 'a church worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of felicitation, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and presiding in love, maintaining the law of Christ, bearer of the Father's name.' The Roman church held this place of honor and exercised a 'presidency in love' among the first Christian churches for two reasons. It was founded on the teaching and blood of the foremost Christian apostles Peter and Paul. And it was the church of the capital city of the Roman empire that then constituted the 'civilized world (oikoumene)'."<ref>[http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/HopkoPope.php Roman Presidency and Christian Unity in our Time]</ref>
Saint Thomas went east, and was said to be instrumental in establishing the Church in the Persian Empire and satellite kingdoms, although [[Addai ]] and Mari]], two of the Seventy Apostles were credited with most of the work of establishment in Persia itself. The [[Persian Church]] was larger than the Mediterranean Church for some centuries, especially in the sixth to eighth centuries with its highly successful movement into [[India]], [[Mongolia]], [[China]], [[Tibet]], [[Korea]], and [[Japan]] <ref>John Binns, ''An Introduction to the Christian Orthodox Churches'', Cambridge University Press, UK, 2002, esp pp 28-29</ref>.
In the fourth century when the Roman emperors were trying to control the Church, theological questions were running rampant throughout the Roman Empire<ref>John Binns, ''An Introduction to the Christian Orthodox Churches'', Cambridge University Press, UK, 2002, pp 162-164</ref>. The influence of Greek speculative thought on Christian thinking led to all sorts of divergent and conflicting opinions <ref>John Binns, ''An Introduction to the Christian Orthodox Churches'', Cambridge University Press, UK, 2002, p68</ref>. Christ's commandment to love others as He loved, seemed to have been lost in the intellectual abstractions of the time. Theology was also used as a weapon against opponent bishops, since being branded a heretic was the only sure way for a bishop to be removed by other bishops. Incompetence was not sufficient grounds for removal.
In the early church up until the ecumenical councils, Rome was regarded as an important centre of Christianity, especially since it was the capital of the Roman Empire. The eastern and southern Mediterranean bishops generally recognized a persuasive leadership and authority of the Bishop of Rome, because the teaching of the bishop of Rome was almost invariably correct.{{Fact|date=December 2008}} But the Mediterrtanean Church did not regard the Bishop of Rome as any sort of infallible source, nor did they acknowledge any juridical authority of Rome.
After the sole emperor of all the Roman Empire [[Constantinethe Great]] built the new imperial capital on the [[Bosphorous]], the centre of gravity in the empire was fully recognised to have completely shifted to the [[eastern Mediterranean]]. Rome lost the senate to Byzantium and lost its status and gravitas as imperial capital.
The patriarchs of [[Constantinople]] often tried to adopt an imperious position over the other patriarchs. In the case of [[Nestorius]], whose actual teaching is now recognised to be not overtly heretical, although it is clearly deficient, (Saint Cyril called it 'slippery'), <ref>John McGuckin, ''Saint Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy'', SVS Press, NY, 2004, p173</ref>, other patriarchs were able to make the charge of heresy stick and successfully had him deposed. This was probably more because his christology was delivered with a heavy sarcastic arrogance which matched his high-handed personality <ref>John McGuckin, ''Saint Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy'', SVS Press, NY, 2004, p173</ref>.
The opinion of the Bishop of Rome was often sought, especially when the patriarchs of the Eastern Mediterranean were locked in fractious dispute. The bishops of Rome never obviously belonged to either the Antiochian or the Alexandrian schools of theology, and usually managed to steer a middle course between whatever extremes were being propounded by theologians of either school. Because Rome was remote from the centres of Christianity in the eastern Mediterranean, it was frequently hoped its bishop would be more impartial. For instance, in 431, Cyril, the patriarch of Alexandria, appealed to Pope [[Pope Celestine I]], as well as the other patriarchs, charging [[Nestorius]] with heresy, which was dealt with at the [[Council of Ephesus]].
The opinion of the bishop of Rome was always canvassed, and was often longed for. However the Bishop of Rome's opinion was by no means automatically right. For instance, the [[Tome of Leo]] of Rome was highly regarded, and formed the basis for the ecumenical council's formulation. But it was not universally accepted and was even called "impious" and "blasphemous" by some.<ref>[http://www.archive.org/download/p2selectletterss02seveuoft/p2selectletterss02seveuoft.pdf The Sixth Book of the Select Letters of Severus, Patriarch of Antioch, vol. II, p. 254]</ref> The next ecumenical council corrected a possible imbalance in Pope Leo's presentation. Although the Bishop of Rome was well-respected even at this early date, the concept of the primacy of the Roman See and [[Papal Infallibilitypapal infallibility]] were only was developed much later.
Following the [[Sack of Rome]] by invading European Goths, Rome slid into the [[Dark Ages]] which afflicted most parts of [[Western Europe]], and became increasingly isolated and irrelevant to the wider Mediterranean Church. This was a situation which suited and pleased a lot of the Eastern Mediterranean patriarchs and bishops <ref>Aristeides Papadakis The Christian East and the Rise of the Papacy, SVS Press, NY, 1994 esp p14</ref>.
