I don't want to get into a debate that's been raging for a millennium, but I should note that the Orthodox don't think of the Pope as "just another bishop," and would agree in the main that were he orthodox, he would have the highest rank among all the Patriarchs and have some sort of primacy of honor (and perhaps of jurisdiction). For a thoughtful and extended treatment of Orthodox views on the Pope, check out The Primacy of Peter: Essays in Ecclesiology and the Early Church, ed. John Meyendorff. (I think the essay by Veselin Kesich is best). Also, this essay by Francis Dvornik, a distillation of his book of the same name, traces the split to the interplay between different theories of primacy taking root in the East and West. Suffice it to say that:
- I read Sardica considerably more narrowly: a local synod that in response to the Arian crisis, granted the Bishop of Rome the right to appoint bishops as appellate judges if the parties weren't satisfied with the judgments of the neighboring bishops. And indeed, Canon 28 of Chalcedon noted that the Fathers "granted privileges to the throne of old Rome, because it was the royal city," and granted equal privileges to Constantinople. It's true that the Pope rejected this canon—but it was received in the East (as Leo himself bitterly noted), reaffirmed at Trullo, and soon put into effect, with the Archbishop of Constantinople presiding over appeals from other sees.
- I've never heard of Montanus's appeal to Rome; I don't remember this mentioned in Eusebius. Where is this described?
- As I recall from Eusebius, it was Aurelian who was emperor during the dispute between Paul and Domnus, and the dispute concerned the patriarchal palace, not the bishopric.
Re: The beliefs and actions of (a) character(s) are not automatically those of the author.
- I read Sardica considerably more narrowly: a local synod that in response to the Arian crisis, granted the Bishop of Rome the right to appoint bishops as appellate judges if the parties weren't satisfied with the judgments of the neighboring bishops. And indeed, Canon 28 of Chalcedon noted that the Fathers "granted privileges to the throne of old Rome, because it was the royal city," and granted equal privileges to Constantinople. It's true that the Pope rejected this canon—but it was received in the East (as Leo himself bitterly noted), reaffirmed at Trullo, and soon put into effect, with the Archbishop of Constantinople presiding over appeals from other sees.
- I've never heard of Montanus's appeal to Rome; I don't remember this mentioned in Eusebius. Where is this described?
- As I recall from Eusebius, it was Aurelian who was emperor during the dispute between Paul and Domnus, and the dispute concerned the patriarchal palace, not the bishopric.