[Gamecock]

SO the EO church left Rome over which pride, I mean error?

[kosta50]

SO the EO church left Rome over which pride, I mean error?

The EO never left the Church. You have your history mixed-up. We haven't changed our theology.

[Cronos]

SO the EO church left Rome over which pride, I mean error?

Each side will say the other left it, but if one takes a non-biased point of view, you can see that historically both raised anathema's against each other so there was a "falling out". Were there / Are there serious differences? YES. However, I am convinced that the final decision to go into schism in 1054 was exacerbated by politics -- on both sides. On the Catholic side, I can agree that the attitude of some Medieval Popes to be ruler over the EO bishops would have rankled quite a bit. The correct attitude is what JPII has taken among the Catholic Patriarchs (The Maronite Patriarch etc.) that the Pope is but the first among equals. This is in line with what the Orthodox have been saying all along.

Are these all the differences between Eastern and Western branches of the Church? No. But I believe by removing Papal rule, it does bring us that little bit closer.

Sticking to the same theme -- many Protestant movements were, in fact, no more than political plays (like the formation of the Anglican Church and, to my mind, the Lutheran as well) which should be reversed. Severe Doctrinal issues like we have with Lutheran doctrine here and Calvinist doctrine are not reconcilable.