Not partial to Lutherans. Easterners tend to view councils with unease. Councils generally create instability and unrest for years afterwards. All the doctrinal issues that concern us were settled in the first seven councils.

Trent was called to address Protestantism. The east cared little about Protestants since they were up to their ears in Muslims, a far greater problem. However, a reason behind Trent was to restore order and stability in the chaotic western church. Trent did set out to place the Vatican in control, so that is not a derogative word.

There is a "kind-a" council in the works for the Orthodox. It will deal with jurisdictional issues, but liturgy is off-the-table and not up for discussion. The council has no authority beyond what the local bishops give it.

The east has an understanding of the papacy as it was understood for the first thousand years of Christianity. For whatever reason, and I suspect it was because popes became temporal monarchs, all that changed so that by the Renaissance, popes were no different than other European monarchs. Fortunately, the Orthodox are not set up so that a single crazy person can get in an office and wreck the ship.

So when y'all gonna call a council?

Councils are a dangerous thing, so I hope never to the degree of a Latin council. Follow the teachings of the first seven and the apostolic canons and you can't go wrong. Also read the Desert Fathers - not the dessert fathers who are much more fun to follow. ;-)

It starts with the bishops. And trickles down.

Trickle-down ecclesiology?

It seems to me that it starts with the pastors, and the pastors who are successful at it become bishops.

Now it sounds a bit like the Peter Principle ... a concept in management theory formulated by Laurence J. Peter in which the selection of a candidate for a position is based on the candidate's performance in their current role, rather than on abilities relevant to the intended role. Thus, employees only stop being promoted once they can no longer perform effectively, and "managers rise to the level of their incompetence."

To expand on the topic: Dr. Peter estimated that employees in large organizations tended to be promoted if they performed 3/4 of their current job successfully. If they reached a position where they were only performing 2/3 of the job well, they wouldn't advance further, but then they would be failing to do 1/3 of the tasks of the position they had reached.

You also don't get promoted if you are doing 100% of your job correctly, but who does that?