So the filioque was basically adopted by the Pope because he

Nice way to fuck up your own thread with such an image.
Retard.

File: hothead.png (237KB, 854x1060px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 854x1060px

>>519018

>>518871
and you got fucked by the turks orthoshill cuck

File: 10255203_745631048804855_6192850781459068468_n.jpg (9KB, 261x195px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 261x195px

So Constantinople wanted to be take the Alexandria's Apostolic place because she was the Emperor's city?

>>520076
But Alexandria never had any place of second honor in doctrine.

>>520086
traditionally it had, that's why the canons giving Constantinople 2nd place were rejected for a long time

>>520312
They had the position, but it certainly wasn't anything set in stone.

File: Pope John Paul II In Prayer.jpg (75KB, 999x1399px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 999x1399px

Is there any good argument AGAINST Petrine/Papal supremacy? Something that isn't obvious Protestant/Orthodox wankery?

Even if you throw them the bone that "Upon this rock I will build my Church" refers not to Peter, but to the faith he demonstrates, it's borne out through the whole of Scripture that Peter is the leader of the Apostles. It's Peter who keeps them together after the Crucifixion and during the Resurrection. Peter is clearly the Apostle that Jesus pays the most attention to, and who he takes the most pains to make sure he understands. It's Peter who decides, totally unilaterally, that the Gentiles can be baptized and brought into the Church. When Paul has a problem with the infant Church, he doesn't talk to Luke or Matthew, he talks to Peter. Peter is clearly the one in charge of everything, and it's not a difficult jump from that to the bishops who succeeded Peter having unique authority. It's a logical extension of the idea of Apostolic Succession.

>>520468
Paul being a leader doesn't he mean he alone has the authority of an Ecumenical Council, or that bishops could only be appointed with his permission.

>>520468
It refers to Peter. It doesn't say shit about succession though.

>>520565
You are a priest forever in the line of Melchizedek.

Jewish priests appointed more priests. Jesus was the Highest High Priest and appointed his followers priests.

Jews were all about that succession.

>>520695
Jesus is the final High Priest, there's no succession after him.

File: 1444938633580.jpg (71KB, 1100x792px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1100x792px

>>518871
you have been shilling trannies for the past 3 weeks. FOR FrEE

>pic: choose one, leave one

>>520783
Kill both.

>>520695

>Jewish priests appointed more priests

This is not true. Jewish priesthood was hereditary. They "Appointed" more priests by siring them.