King having a Church role

[dominikus28]

The Eastern Church/government begins to pattern itself after the Davidic Kingdom of Israel, with the Emperor possessing an essential Church office

davidmacd.com/catholic/orthodox/timeline_history_of_catholic_orthodox_relations.htm

If Orthodox Church based it’s theology on the Emperor (Russian Emperor had authority in the Church, unlike Kings in Europe) on the Old Testament where the King of Israel also had a role in the Church. This kind of confuses me, because I always thought that Orthodox Church made the innovation by giving authority to the Emperor, but I guess it looks like the innovation comes from the Catholic side and the Eastern Orthodox are following the traditional model.
In that case, what is really wrong with the Emperor or King having power of the the Church? When the Pope and the Holy Roman EMperor were fighting about the Investiture COntroversy, did the Holy Roman Emperor have a just claim? Maybe I am wrong, but it seems he did.

Please share what you think. Thanks

 

[JonathonofOhio]

davidmacd.com/catholic/orthodox/timeline_history_of_catholic_orthodox_relations.htm

In that case, what is really wrong with the Emperor or King having power of the the Church?

I would venture to guess it’s because Jesus is King of heaven and earth and his Church is independent of kings and kingdoms of the earth…no king or emperor has power of or over the church, because the church recognizes only one King.

I’m no expert on the history you are talking about, but I know that Christ is King, and the Church has always been an apostolic church, so for a king or a emperor to have power of the church they would have to get that through apostolic succession, but I don’t see that happening since it would be a big conflict of interest.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Who called the First Ecumenical Council? Emperor Constantine I the Great
The Second? Emperor Theodosius I
The Third? Emperor Theodosius II
The Fourth? Emperor Marcian
The Fifth? Emperor Justinian
The Sixth? Emperor Constantine IV
The Seventh? Empress Irene
etc.

 

[JonathonofOhio]

Who called the First Ecumenical Council? Emperor Constantine I the Great
The Second? Emperor Theodosius I
The Third? Emperor Theodosius II
The Fourth? Emperor Marcian
The Fifth? Emperor Justinian
The Sixth? Emperor Constantine IV
The Seventh? Empress Irene
etc.

But did they have the final say in matters of doctrine? I don’t recall ever reading anything like that…I would think that it is only logical, given the times you are referring to, that the Emperor would have some sort of say as far as legal matters are concerned to form a council of a new religious group that was rapidly growing in numbers. People didn’t always have the right to form councils and the freedom to practice their religion openly-- they had to get permission to do so, and if a person practiced a religion not sanctioned by the ‘state’, it was considered treason. The emperor at the time had the responsibility of keeping the peace, so of course he would be the one to ‘call’ the council to settle a dispute going on within a new, and growing religious group. Time are different now, so I don’t see why the church would continue that sort of thing if it’s not necessary or required by any law…besides, the Church is now many different countries…which emperor or king is the church supposed to appoint?