Talk:Church of Constantinople
Revision as of 17:38, March 30, 2007 by Frjohnwhiteford (talk | contribs)
The recent canonical notes, ISTM, belong better in the Prerogatives of the Ecumenical Patriarchate article, probably in the main body of the text. Additionally, the accompanying commentary should be set in its context as being part of the Kollyvades movement of the time, expanded with the arguments of those on other sides of the question. —Fr. Andrew talk contribs 06:17, March 30, 2007 (PDT)
- I have never seen any of the great canonists of the Church cited in support of the novel interpretation given to these canons by the ultramontane advocates of the EP's claims today. I would be interested in seeing such citations, if any exist. Frjohnwhiteford 10:38, March 30, 2007 (PDT)
