The magisterium back then believed that the See of Peter was divided between the Bishop of Antioch, Alexandria and Rome. Thus, that is why Pope Gregory, whom you say is the Universal Pastor (though he himself rejected the notion of the Universal Bishop, calling it the spirit of anti-Christ) and Theodoret, a Bishop, expressed that.
I never said any such thing. And you must realize that Theodoret died a century before Gregory the Great was born. Theodoret was a bishop of Syria, not a part of the Latin branch. Where do you people learn to understand history? Where do you get your history from, anyway? Wikipedia? Little coloured booklets tucked under windshield wipers whilst attending Mass?
You keep saying that I insult you and will not answer your points. You keep claiming that you make these points and don't actually make them. If you wish to engage in serious dialogue, then please do so. Until then, I regard your posts as merely frivolous and extremely antiCatholic, as well as antiChristian and completely opposed to history as we know it.
“You have repeatedly claimed that you have made points or arguments that you actually never made.”
You’re projecting your own bad habits on me. Sorry, but I have the actual “trail” of posts to know I’ve challenged you on this issue plenty of times and have defined it fully, identifying who and what is involved.
Do you notice how you are spending more time debating the debate or debating my character and actions than answering my very simple challenges?
“I never said any such thing. And you must realize that Theodoret died a century before Gregory the Great was born.”
So the Magisterium did not change on that point for over a century.
“Theodoret was a bishop of Syria, not a part of the Latin branch.”
So, were the Syrians and the “Popes” of Rome split at that time? Was “Pope” Gregory the First a rebel Pope who fell into the bad Syrian faction a cenury later and started mouthing their talking points?
“Where do you people learn to understand history?”
Where do you people learn your deductive reasoning?
“You keep saying that I insult you and will not answer your points. You keep claiming that you make these points and don’t actually make them.”
God help me, he farted in my general direction and is back to the insults again!
“as well as antiChristian and completely opposed to history as we know it.”
I regard yours as non-existent, having no basis in history, since Roman Papal views on the primacy of Rome were an innovation, and not a consistent part of Church tradition.
But as for me, I’ll lean on the promises of Christ, which vindicate me just as much as the Thief on the cross. Oh, my God, thou has had mercy on me, a sinner!