English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

That question is about the separation between Eastern Ortodox and Catholics.

2006-07-26 00:01:25 · 5 answers · asked by galinredo 1 in Arts & Humanities History

5 answers

Both the first and third answers are partially correct. The Cannons were important, but were only one factor.

The Ecumenical Council was at Nicea, not Nice. The change in the word of that phrase doesn't include "procedeth", but rather "proceeds from the Father 'and the Son'" and it's called the Filioque clause (Fee Lee O Kway).

The Council of Nicea was considered to be infallible and it was declared at the conclusion of the council that all beliefs enunciated at the council were binding on all Christians and that no changes could be made without another Ecumenical council making them lest one be declared anathema. This was reiterated by the 8th Ecumenical Council. This phrase was not included in the Creed by the Councils of Nicea or Constantinople, and the Orthodox Churches consider this inclusion to be a heresy.

Most important in its addition is that the Bishop of Rome added this without authority. That was very much a power play and the beginning salvo in a movement to declare that Rome was the leader of all Christianity and that the Pope (Bishop of Rome) has "papal supremacy" over the patriarchs of the Sister Churches of the Orthodox Churches. You have to remember that the Bishop of Alexandria, leader of the Coptic Church, is also called "Pope", so it's more accurate to refer to the one who overstepped his bounds as the Bishop of Rome which is his official title.

But that was only the insult. The injury came between 1200 and 1453. First Venetian crusaders laid siege to Constantinople and laid waste to the town. Very bad and a direct insult to the Eastern Orthodox by their Latin brethren. Then came the final siege of the Ottoman Turks against Constantinople and the primate of the Eastern (Greek) Orthodox Church begged the Pope to send aid, but for one reason or another the Pope either dallied in coming to the aid of the East or intentionally delayed aid and Constantinople was permanently lost to Christianity. It was the final act in the East-West Schism.

This is also the source of the great fighting we've been seeing in the Balkans between Catholics, Orthodox and Muslims...so it's a wound that is far from healed.

For centuries, the primates of the East excommunicated the Bishop of Rome and anyone who followed him (NKA Roman Catholics), and likewise the Bishop of Rome excommunicated the leaders of all of the Churches of the East and all of the Eastern Orthodox. Both sides have lifted their bilateral excommunications and the Roman Catholics will allow Eastern Orthodox to worship openly in Catholic churches, but the Eastern Orthodox have not reciprocated.

2006-07-26 02:55:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 14 1

The Roman Empire, wherein Christianity matured, had a "pentarchy" ("5-ruler") gadget a very long term in the previous the schism. each section had its own self sustaining patriarch. The 5 patriarches have been (and all exist at present), the Pope of Rome (the capital of the united Roman empire, and the capital of the Western Roman empire), the Patriarch of Constantinople (the 2d capital of the united empire, and the capital of the jap Roman empire), the Pope of Alexandria (sure, Pope, even at present), the Patriarch of Antioch, and the Patriarch of Jerusalem. each of those 5 became the utmost non secular authority in his own area. After the cave in of the Western Roman empire, the Pope became the two the only non secular authority and the only ruling authority for a time. Rome began to think of that its exalted place interior the church might desire to word to all the others interior the pentarchy. That became a marvel to the different patriarches, who rejected Rome's advances. The cut up occurred partly because of the fact Rome's information of itself replaced, and the others did no longer agree. The have been by no capacity concern to Rome, and observed no reason to start now. St. Augustine became no longer a Pope, yet a bishop. He an Orthodox saint, however with some questionable doctrines that reason some to call him "Blessed Augustine". Pope St. Gregory the great is widespread as "St. Gregory Dialogos" because of the fact of his Dialogues, yet amply called the two Pope of Rome and a saint interior the jap Orthodox Church. The Orthodox do no longer see the Pope of Rome as a great-bishop because of the fact he wasn't considered that way for the 1st one thousand years of Christianity. advantages. /Orthodox

2016-12-14 14:08:43 · answer #2 · answered by mordino 4 · 0 0

In 325 CE, Council of Nice was held, where four hundred bishops gathered to establish a unified and government-controlled religion. Emperor Constantine built churches across the land, and enforced the new faith (Christianity was kind of new then). He combined the most popular elements of Christianity with those of other cults in order to make the new doctrine more attractive. His maneuvering worked, as this was the foundation of the Holy Roman Empire.

The decisions of the Council (Nicene Creed), became something of a holy scripture itself. It contained the specific outline of what made one a Christian, in the form of theological beliefs. For example, one line of the Creed reads as follows:

We believe in the Holy Spirit,
The Lord and Giver of Life,
Who proceedeth from the Father.

Originally, the Christian religion was quite decentralized, and any given church had its own way of doing things. When issues arose that concerned everybody, large gatherings of Bishops and religious leaders were called together so the issues could be debated and ruled upon. The Council of Nice itself is an example of this process.

It was not until three hundred years later that a major schism took place within the organization, creating two distinct branches of the faith: Orthodox and Catholic. Though it may be hard to believe, the division was created by the inclusion of a single Latin word into a song. This was done by a French priest who was working on setting the Nicene Creed (in Latin) to the music of Gregorian chant. Apparently, he had trouble with the line quoted above, as the metre of the song left a few notes of the chant without lyrics. In order to "flesh out" the words to fit the music, the priest added the four syllable word filioque onto the line- changing it to:

We believe in the Holy Spirit,
The Lord and Giver of Life,
Who proceedeth from the Father, and from the Son.

As the song became popular, it brought the theological implications of the lyrical addition into the spotlight. One camp saw little problem with the inclusion, while others felt it inappropriate to alter the Creed- especially where it concerned the natures of both the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ. In 589 CE, the Third Council of Toledo officially accepted the new word into the Creed, and effectively divided the faith in two. Those who refused to accept the new Creed separated into the Eastern Orthodox faith (centralized in Constantinople under the guidance of the "Ecumenical Patriarch"), and those who remained became the Catholic Church (centralized in Rome under the "Pope").

2006-07-26 00:55:44 · answer #3 · answered by Rowena D 3 · 0 0

With the Cannons. There are 22 central canons for the Catholics, the Orthodox church only beleives in the first 3 or 4, they split and then developed their own

Went pear shape shortly after the Nicene creed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_schism

2006-07-26 00:11:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

i think da link might be of use http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php

2006-07-26 00:16:27 · answer #5 · answered by Sandeep K 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers