To me it seems that from a certain point in time, there seems to be a very deep divide on the West and the East's understanding of the role of the Bishop of Rome. The East have always maintained that Rome is no more than the West, while the East had her different provinces (Antioch took care of the Far East, and not even all of those were subject to the authority of Antioch; Alexandria all of Africa; and then there was Jerusalem). Constantinople later on took on a large role as New Rome in the East.
Whatever it may be, this shows actually a difference in understanding between the Greek and the Latin. The Latins thought Rome was the center of the world Church, whereas the Greek thought Rome was one of the centers of the Church, but not THE center.
The question isn't who changed. It's clear the Latins in translating the text seem to have read the council of Nicea differently than the Greeks.