I don’t think that I can answer your question on the Pan-Orthodox and local synods better than Augustine already has. Certainly his take on who authorised the local synods and how they became accepted by the whole Church is exactly what I would have said (though maybe not with identical words – mine would have been liable to be more long-winded).
Ignoring the last two posts, where you two both seem to be having a go at each other, I’m not sure why you took offense to Augustine’s explanation. I’m really not sure that I can see any anti-Latin polemics in there, unless perhaps you mean his referring to Latin persecution of the Orthodox? Personally, I don’t see that as polemical as it is a fact that even RCs are usually happy to acknowledge nowadays, hence JPII’s apologies.
As for your last reply to me, I did see your warning as joking, right up until the point where I read your obvious implication that I wasn’t willing to try to understand your side of the argument. [i:2r2f8s3k]That[/i:2r2f8s3k] is what caused me to answer as I did as I found it mildly insulting, especially given that when I ask you to explain your side you rarely seem to want to do so. I also fail to see where I was telling you what you believe. I think you should read my posts again. I did tell you how the RC ideas appeared to us and I also asked if that perception was true. That is hardly comparing and contrasting our beliefs and as yet I seem to be the only person answering questions, which isn’t exactly conducive to a discussion.
As far as I can see up to this point, the Orthodox perception to be correct: that the RCC means by ‘doctrinal development’ not the legitimate development of understanding of (or language used to describe) doctrine, but the use of human reason to work out new doctrines logically deductable from revealed doctrine. If, on the other hand, you believe that it is our perception of your position that is wrong rather than that we have a genuine disagreement as to what legitimate development entails then I would appreciate it if you could explain just why you feel we are wong – preferrably by referring to the sorts of doctrines developed in the post-Schism west.