[annalex]

Its nonexistent

I just gave you an example of an important piece of patristic literature where a bishop of Rome corrects someone whom he accuses of sedition and implies Aaronic privilege.

[Mr Rogers]

I believe there are a number of instances where the Bishop of Rome, during the first 400+ years, TRIES to tell other Bishops what to do, without their accepting it. In this letter, a Bishop is telling laity to accept an elder...which is not exactly radical teaching for any church...except Baptists!

[kosta50]

I just gave you an example of an important piece of patristic literature where a bishop of Rome corrects someone [ in huis jurisdiction] whom he accuses of sedition and implies Aaronic privilege. [perhaps, perhaps not; it could be a latter-day addition, as dmeonstrated in previous post]

[Kolokotronis]

“I just gave you an example of an important piece of patristic literature where a bishop of Rome corrects someone whom he accuses of sedition and implies Aaronic privilege.”

Alex, the writings of The Fathers are full of instances where a Patriarch or Metropolitan corrects other bishops. There is even the use of the story of Korah in those corrections and by the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Constantinople. The consensus patrum, it seems to me, is clear. The story is used to support hierarchial ecclesiology. The Fathers knew the story, Alex. Its clear they didn’t connect it to papal supremacy.