Spór o tytuł patriarchy ekumenicznego pomiędzy papieżem Grzegorzem Wielkim a biskupami Konstantynopola w świetle walki o prymat w Kościele powszechnym

Abstract

A quarrel about the title „ecumenical patriarch” was inseparably connected with struggle for primacy in Universal Church. This struggle was first started between Rome and Alexandria but in the middle of Vth century the most important rival of Rome became Constantinopie. The groving position of Constantinople’s bishop was caused by the fact that his city became in the begining of IVth century the capital of the empire. So, it was in the emperors’ interest to give to the bishop of their capital the same rights as those of the bishops of Old Rome. The groving importance and authority of Constantinople’s bishops resulted from new needs and natural evolution so, it was easily accepted in the Eastern part of the empire. It was confirmed both by the dedssions of the two ecumenical councils (Constantinople - 381 and Chalcedon - 451) and by emperors’ legislation. Hence, the bishops of Constantinople became the most important in the East. Popes opposed the groving authority of their rivals in Constantinople. They started to question the rule which connected closely the rank of the bishopric with the political importence of the city in which it was situated. They created and explicated the theory of apostolic origin of only 3 bishoprics - Rome, Alexandria and Antioch which were in their opinion the only autentic Patriarchats. Popes started to act as St. Peter’s succesores and tried to get independence from secular authorities. In spite of the efforts undertaken by them the importance of bishops of Constantinople was still groving. Rome’s rights to interfere with Eastern patriarchates were repudiated by them. They rejected the aspirations of popes to control the Church. That was the source of the quaxrel concerning the title „ecumenical patriarch” .