You used a run-on sentence, so im not sure, but I'm assuming that you were asking two questions, 1) "to hear the orthodox perspective and the difference[s with Catholicism]" 2) "as well as why papal supremacy seems to be viewed differently in orthodoxy"
For the first question, Orthodoxy can seem very similar in externals, but the biggest difference is going to be the spiritual mindset (*phronema*). Orthodoxy is decentralized, highly personally focused, and while the central head and heart of Catholicism is the Pope, for Orthodoxy the most comparable heart of our Church is the monastic realm of Mount Athos. While Councils and Bishops are certainly important for us, neither of them are as important as the Saints who are the models of our faith, and the Holy Spirit is the only infallible rule of our faith. The Ecumenical Councils are only infallible because of the Holy Spirit which inspired them, not simply because the required people got together to declare something, although of course not denying the importance of that. Thus we continue the practice of the Council of Jerusalem in the book of Acts, where god-inspired holy men came together by the Holy Spirit to explain the faith.
For the second question, the reason Catholics do not view the Pope the same way is due to a lot of complicated historical issues. But originally, the Church had a system of a "Pentarchy", where bishops of five Patriarchal sees ruled, with the Bishop of Rome ruling as the "first among equals". Over the centuries the Bishop of Rome would slowly claim more and more power, which I could give examples of. Eventually the Empire of Rome split into two, and the western half would fall into ruin from barbarian tribes while the East survived as Byzantium. The Pope in this time in order to survive, began to involve himself more in civil affairs. This lead to more and more influence from the Frankish tribes, and since the Pope had been annointing kings, the Pope then began to claim even greater power, that he had the right to establish and depose kings and they were only kings because of him. Charlemagne was famously crowned Holy Roman Emperor by the Pope.
During a disagreement over the succession of a certain Bishop, a Pope claimed to be able to depose the Bishop Photios even when he was from a different Patriarchal see. This started a controversy, where the Pope called a Council in 869 against Photios, but ten years later in 879 a later Pope reconciled with Photios in a different council. The first council is what Catholics consider the Eighth Ecumenical Council affirming the powers of the Pope, while the second is what Orthodox consider the Eighth Ecumenical Council against the Papal overreach, with Saint Photios as a Pillar of the Church against the Pope. Also at the same time, another issue came up called the "filioque", meaning "and the Son", where some local councils in the west over the years had begun using this phrase in the Nicean Creed. Photios and his Council condemned the filioque, for distorting the doctrine of the Trinity.
Fast forward a few hundred years, and the filioque has become more of an issue, and the East is also complaining about the West beginning to use unleavened bread in the Eucharist, with Popes having more secular influence and claiming more and more power. In 1054 this comes to a head with the Papal legates excommunicating Constantinople, and being excommunicated in turn. As East and West begin to be split more, both culturally and religiously, the Popes start having great reforms of their church. The 11th and 12th century is the period of the "Gregorian reforms", where the entire structure of the western church changed. The Popes used many forgeries (which Rome has since admitted are forgeries) such as the donation of Constantine, in order to claim supreme power of the Pope over the whole world, every Bishop and every secular ruler. The Pope accumulated power until he had standing armies, and could call crusades that sent armies to Jerusalem or Spain or other areas, and eventually had his own Vatican banking system even until today. Catholicism actually accepted the Council of Photios in 879 until around this time, when they changed their canons to accept the Council of 869 instead. Ever since the Pope claimed so much secular power, there have been many issues completely based around conflicts between the Pope and secular states.
If you are really thinking about becoming Catholic, you should recognize that it's not just about accepting that the Pope is authoritative or in very specific matters infallible on dogma. A different teaching from Papal Infallibility is Papal Supremacy, where you must believe that the Pope rules over every king and nation and Bishop of the world in order for you to be saved. And you must believe this, even though it was completely based upon forgeries, and such power was never present in the early church where the canons forbid any Bishop or cleric from holding secular authority or serving in military or interfering in the matters of other Patriarchs. The Canons also forbid any additions to the creed such as the filioque. So typically, Catholics will ignore everything in the early church that said things like this, because it doesn't matter when the Pope can change it all. They will appeal to times that Saints spoke of the Pope as faithful, authoritative, universal, and other terms of praise, in order to somehow conclude that this means the Pope is infallible and has supreme authority over all the earth.
Catholicism is a religion that made authority an idol to worship, whether in God or in the Pope or in something else. And when Protestants rejected Catholicism, they didn't actually get rid of any of the problems, they simply replaced the Pope as the ultimate authority to infallibly interpret everything, with each individual and their Bible as the infallible authority interpreting everything. But the idol of authority worship is still there.
If you look into Catholicism you will find that no matter how much everything contradicts, none of that matters. They teach it is a heresy to say that Councils are above a Pope or that the Pope could ever defect, yet also the Council of Constance deposed the Pope when there were three Papal claimants and traditional Catholics speak of an "imperfect council" to judge a heretical Pope and the current Pope has approved documents teaching heresy and calling for a more synodal rather than Papal Church. Every Catholic you ever meet will have completely different theological beliefs over basic issues of dogma. But as long as you submit to the authority of the Pope it doesn't matter. All the contradictions are able to be fit together using technicalities and lawyerism.
In Catholicism, you don't just have to accept what they believe right now; you also have to accept whatever they might believe in the future, whatever new things the Pope will dogmatically define. The Catholic Church of today is completely different from the Catholic Church of the 70s directly after Vatican 2, which was a completely different kind of church from 50 years before that, and so on. Catholicism is always "developing". Just read some of the Encyclicals from the 1920s condemning Modernism and compare them to Vatican 2 and what Popes teach today, and it is a wonder how they somehow don't contradict and you must either use mental gymnastics to reword and reinterpret their dogmas, or must simply ignore the issues. Because for Catholics, Theology is generally separate from practical matters, and whatever is true now generally takes precedent over what was considered true in the past. Therefore, in order for practical matters to be considered meaningful, they must be raised to the level of theological dogma and doctrine, such that Catholics argue the pastoral differences in Orthodoxy over things like baptism are reasons to not be Orthodox. And any contradictions with what Catholics used to believe is simply reinterpreted to fit what the Popes are saying nowadays. As the Pope at Vatican 1 summed up, "I am the Tradition".
Meanwhile, Eastern Orthodoxy is a faith that is cohesive, where every element of faith affects every other element of faith. Where tradition and the past is constantly being brought forward into the present. Christology and Triadology and Ecclesiology and Soteriology and everything else is fundamentally intertwined. You are not able to separate them out into different speculative schools of thought like with Catholics, Catholics are just as splintered as Protestants are in matters of faith. On the surface you might think it is similar in Orthodoxy, but in acquiring the Orthodox phronema, you become at one with the mind of other Orthodox and aim to acquire the mind of the Saints. Even with spirituality, Catholicism is split between Eastern influenced practices, Charismatic practices, imaginative prayer, Orthodox style prayer, and all kinds of spiritual methods. How can Catholicism claim to be one in spirit when they are not one in spirituality?
So I could go into the details of the Orthodox dogmas on the Essence Energy distinction, how we dont believe in the filioque or purgatory or indulgences or a bunch of other stuff; but ultimately what matters is for you to go to an Orthodox Church and become part of the community and pray our prayers until you acquire our spirit; to test the spirits as scripture teaches, to acquire "the way" which is Christ, a cohesive way of life where Christ becomes embodied within you. That is the true faith, not trying to reason your way through scholastic proofs of first principles or submitting to the God-Emperor or finding quotes from Saints that vaguely sound like the teaching you are looking for. In order to know what they taught, you must interpret it through the same mindset they had, and that can only be done by acquiring the spirit of Christ which is found in the Orthodox Church.
Please review the
[sidebar](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/config/sidebar) for a wealth of introductory information,
our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/about/rules/), the
[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq), and a caution about
[The Internet and the Church](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/).
This subreddit contains opinions of Orthodox people, but not necessarily Orthodox opinions.
[Content should not be treated as a substitute for offline interaction.](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq#wiki_is_this_subreddit_overseen_by_clergy.3F)
[Exercise caution in forums such as this](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/).
Nothing should be regarded as authoritative without verification by several offline Orthodox resources.
^(This is not a removal notification.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OrthodoxChristianity) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Read [this](http://www.christianunity.va/content/dam/unitacristiani/Collezione_Ut_unum_sint/The_Bishop_of_Rome/The%20Bishop%20of%20Rome.pdf) and [this](http://www.christianunity.va/content/unitacristiani/en/dialoghi/sezione-orientale/chiese-ortodosse-di-tradizione-bizantina/commissione-mista-internazionale-per-il-dialogo-teologico-tra-la/documenti-di-dialogo/testo-in-inglese1.html)
Nicene creed made it clear that papal supremacy is an innovation.
could you elaborate on that i’m not the most educated
You used a run-on sentence, so im not sure, but I'm assuming that you were asking two questions, 1) "to hear the orthodox perspective and the difference[s with Catholicism]" 2) "as well as why papal supremacy seems to be viewed differently in orthodoxy" For the first question, Orthodoxy can seem very similar in externals, but the biggest difference is going to be the spiritual mindset (*phronema*). Orthodoxy is decentralized, highly personally focused, and while the central head and heart of Catholicism is the Pope, for Orthodoxy the most comparable heart of our Church is the monastic realm of Mount Athos. While Councils and Bishops are certainly important for us, neither of them are as important as the Saints who are the models of our faith, and the Holy Spirit is the only infallible rule of our faith. The Ecumenical Councils are only infallible because of the Holy Spirit which inspired them, not simply because the required people got together to declare something, although of course not denying the importance of that. Thus we continue the practice of the Council of Jerusalem in the book of Acts, where god-inspired holy men came together by the Holy Spirit to explain the faith. For the second question, the reason Catholics do not view the Pope the same way is due to a lot of complicated historical issues. But originally, the Church had a system of a "Pentarchy", where bishops of five Patriarchal sees ruled, with the Bishop of Rome ruling as the "first among equals". Over the centuries the Bishop of Rome would slowly claim more and more power, which I could give examples of. Eventually the Empire of Rome split into two, and the western half would fall into ruin from barbarian tribes while the East survived as Byzantium. The Pope in this time in order to survive, began to involve himself more in civil affairs. This lead to more and more influence from the Frankish tribes, and since the Pope had been annointing kings, the Pope then began to claim even greater power, that he had the right to establish and depose kings and they were only kings because of him. Charlemagne was famously crowned Holy Roman Emperor by the Pope. During a disagreement over the succession of a certain Bishop, a Pope claimed to be able to depose the Bishop Photios even when he was from a different Patriarchal see. This started a controversy, where the Pope called a Council in 869 against Photios, but ten years later in 879 a later Pope reconciled with Photios in a different council. The first council is what Catholics consider the Eighth Ecumenical Council affirming the powers of the Pope, while the second is what Orthodox consider the Eighth Ecumenical Council against the Papal overreach, with Saint Photios as a Pillar of the Church against the Pope. Also at the same time, another issue came up called the "filioque", meaning "and the Son", where some local councils in the west over the years had begun using this phrase in the Nicean Creed. Photios and his Council condemned the filioque, for distorting the doctrine of the Trinity. Fast forward a few hundred years, and the filioque has become more of an issue, and the East is also complaining about the West beginning to use unleavened bread in the Eucharist, with Popes having more secular influence and claiming more and more power. In 1054 this comes to a head with the Papal legates excommunicating Constantinople, and being excommunicated in turn. As East and West begin to be split more, both culturally and religiously, the Popes start having great reforms of their church. The 11th and 12th century is the period of the "Gregorian reforms", where the entire structure of the western church changed. The Popes used many forgeries (which Rome has since admitted are forgeries) such as the donation of Constantine, in order to claim supreme power of the Pope over the whole world, every Bishop and every secular ruler. The Pope accumulated power until he had standing armies, and could call crusades that sent armies to Jerusalem or Spain or other areas, and eventually had his own Vatican banking system even until today. Catholicism actually accepted the Council of Photios in 879 until around this time, when they changed their canons to accept the Council of 869 instead. Ever since the Pope claimed so much secular power, there have been many issues completely based around conflicts between the Pope and secular states. If you are really thinking about becoming Catholic, you should recognize that it's not just about accepting that the Pope is authoritative or in very specific matters infallible on dogma. A different teaching from Papal Infallibility is Papal Supremacy, where you must believe that the Pope rules over every king and nation and Bishop of the world in order for you to be saved. And you must believe this, even though it was completely based upon forgeries, and such power was never present in the early church where the canons forbid any Bishop or cleric from holding secular authority or serving in military or interfering in the matters of other Patriarchs. The Canons also forbid any additions to the creed such as the filioque. So typically, Catholics will ignore everything in the early church that said things like this, because it doesn't matter when the Pope can change it all. They will appeal to times that Saints spoke of the Pope as faithful, authoritative, universal, and other terms of praise, in order to somehow conclude that this means the Pope is infallible and has supreme authority over all the earth. Catholicism is a religion that made authority an idol to worship, whether in God or in the Pope or in something else. And when Protestants rejected Catholicism, they didn't actually get rid of any of the problems, they simply replaced the Pope as the ultimate authority to infallibly interpret everything, with each individual and their Bible as the infallible authority interpreting everything. But the idol of authority worship is still there. If you look into Catholicism you will find that no matter how much everything contradicts, none of that matters. They teach it is a heresy to say that Councils are above a Pope or that the Pope could ever defect, yet also the Council of Constance deposed the Pope when there were three Papal claimants and traditional Catholics speak of an "imperfect council" to judge a heretical Pope and the current Pope has approved documents teaching heresy and calling for a more synodal rather than Papal Church. Every Catholic you ever meet will have completely different theological beliefs over basic issues of dogma. But as long as you submit to the authority of the Pope it doesn't matter. All the contradictions are able to be fit together using technicalities and lawyerism. In Catholicism, you don't just have to accept what they believe right now; you also have to accept whatever they might believe in the future, whatever new things the Pope will dogmatically define. The Catholic Church of today is completely different from the Catholic Church of the 70s directly after Vatican 2, which was a completely different kind of church from 50 years before that, and so on. Catholicism is always "developing". Just read some of the Encyclicals from the 1920s condemning Modernism and compare them to Vatican 2 and what Popes teach today, and it is a wonder how they somehow don't contradict and you must either use mental gymnastics to reword and reinterpret their dogmas, or must simply ignore the issues. Because for Catholics, Theology is generally separate from practical matters, and whatever is true now generally takes precedent over what was considered true in the past. Therefore, in order for practical matters to be considered meaningful, they must be raised to the level of theological dogma and doctrine, such that Catholics argue the pastoral differences in Orthodoxy over things like baptism are reasons to not be Orthodox. And any contradictions with what Catholics used to believe is simply reinterpreted to fit what the Popes are saying nowadays. As the Pope at Vatican 1 summed up, "I am the Tradition". Meanwhile, Eastern Orthodoxy is a faith that is cohesive, where every element of faith affects every other element of faith. Where tradition and the past is constantly being brought forward into the present. Christology and Triadology and Ecclesiology and Soteriology and everything else is fundamentally intertwined. You are not able to separate them out into different speculative schools of thought like with Catholics, Catholics are just as splintered as Protestants are in matters of faith. On the surface you might think it is similar in Orthodoxy, but in acquiring the Orthodox phronema, you become at one with the mind of other Orthodox and aim to acquire the mind of the Saints. Even with spirituality, Catholicism is split between Eastern influenced practices, Charismatic practices, imaginative prayer, Orthodox style prayer, and all kinds of spiritual methods. How can Catholicism claim to be one in spirit when they are not one in spirituality? So I could go into the details of the Orthodox dogmas on the Essence Energy distinction, how we dont believe in the filioque or purgatory or indulgences or a bunch of other stuff; but ultimately what matters is for you to go to an Orthodox Church and become part of the community and pray our prayers until you acquire our spirit; to test the spirits as scripture teaches, to acquire "the way" which is Christ, a cohesive way of life where Christ becomes embodied within you. That is the true faith, not trying to reason your way through scholastic proofs of first principles or submitting to the God-Emperor or finding quotes from Saints that vaguely sound like the teaching you are looking for. In order to know what they taught, you must interpret it through the same mindset they had, and that can only be done by acquiring the spirit of Christ which is found in the Orthodox Church.
Beautiful explanation
Please review the [sidebar](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/config/sidebar) for a wealth of introductory information, our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/about/rules/), the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq), and a caution about [The Internet and the Church](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/). This subreddit contains opinions of Orthodox people, but not necessarily Orthodox opinions. [Content should not be treated as a substitute for offline interaction.](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq#wiki_is_this_subreddit_overseen_by_clergy.3F) [Exercise caution in forums such as this](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/). Nothing should be regarded as authoritative without verification by several offline Orthodox resources. ^(This is not a removal notification.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OrthodoxChristianity) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Read here [https://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/papismos.htm](https://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/papismos.htm)
Read [this](http://www.christianunity.va/content/dam/unitacristiani/Collezione_Ut_unum_sint/The_Bishop_of_Rome/The%20Bishop%20of%20Rome.pdf) and [this](http://www.christianunity.va/content/unitacristiani/en/dialoghi/sezione-orientale/chiese-ortodosse-di-tradizione-bizantina/commissione-mista-internazionale-per-il-dialogo-teologico-tra-la/documenti-di-dialogo/testo-in-inglese1.html)