Why did the Roman Catholic Church separate from the Eastern Orthodox Church?

Question

What are the differences between the two churches?

Answer 1

Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics separated from one another in 1054 mostly over the authority of the Pope.

There are very few theological differences. The main difference is that the Eastern Orthodox Churches (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11329a.htm) use the Byzantine Rite (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04312d.htm) and the Roman Catholic Church use the Roman or Latin Rite.

Pope John Paul II said of the Eastern Orthodox Churches in Orientale Lumen, "A particularly close link already binds us. We have almost everything in common." (see http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_02051995_orientale-lumen_en.html)

With love in Christ.

Answer 2

Just who separated from whom?

Differences? Well, for one, how many minister/priests of the RC church are married? How many of the Eastern Orthodox churches are married?

It seems the RC Church refused to abide by the decisions of the "Universal" Church councils/ the Eastern Orthodox Churches disagreed with some of the "traditions" that th RC Church insisted upon.


The schism between the Eastern and Western churches is traditionally dated to 1054, although the precise point at which the split became a fixed and lasting reality is difficult to determine. Many causes contributed to the growing misunderstanding and alienation between the two groups. Partly these were differences of philosophical understanding, liturgical usage, language, and custom, but political rivalries and divisions were also involved. Occasions of friction, hostility, and open division on doctrinal questions as well as matters of discipline and daily practice had occurred long before 1054 - for example, the Photian schism of the 9th century.

In the West the Latin church and especially the papacy took on many activities and powers in default of other authority, but this action was often regarded as usurpation by the East, where a different relationship existed between emperor and church. The heated disputes over such matters as the ecclesiastical calendar, the use of leavened or unleavened bread, or additions to the Creed (notably the filioque clause) reached a climax in 1054, when Pope Leo IX and Patriarch Michael Cerularius excommunicated each other. Technically, only a few people were affected by this action, but the tone had been set and the direction fixed.

Answer 3

There were many sources of tensions.

* The insertion of the filioque clause into the Nicene Creed. The Western Church says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father AND the Son, whereas the Eastern Church says that it only proceeds from the Father.
* Disputes in the Balkans, Southern Italy, and Sicily over whether the Western or Eastern church had jurisdiction.
* The designation of the Patriarch of Constantinople as ecumenical patriarch (which was understood by Rome as universal patriarch and therefore disputed).
* Disputes over whether the Patriarch of Rome, the Pope, should be considered a higher authority than the other Patriarchs.
* The concept of Caesaropapism, a tying together in some way of the ultimate political and religious authorities, which were physically separated much earlier when the capital of the empire was moved from Rome to Constantinople.
* Following the rise of Islam, the relative weakening of the influence of the patriarchs of Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria, leading to internal church politics increasingly being seen as Rome versus Constantinople.
* Certain liturgical practices in the West that the East believed represented innovation: the use of unleavened bread for the Eucharist, for example.

Answer 4

many of these answers are not touching on the reality of the break.

Originally the first break/ schism was over bread! Yes bread the use of unleaven verse leaven and not papal authority or changing of the Christian creed.
because of local patriarchal jurisdiction some communities of the Eastern ( who we call eastern Orthodox) custom were forced to use the customs of the Latins in the Church (primarily those in southern Italy and Sicily) and vise versa for Latin populations in Asia minor (modern day Turkey and Greece).

During the early Church councils the agreements on doctrinal proclamations took the ratification of the bishop of Rome. papal authority was accepted as valid contrary to what Eastern Orthodox now claim.

The changing of the creed was also spelled out in a later general council and logically acceptable because of binding nature of these general councils of which the Eastern Churches had voice in (the holy spirit procedes from the father and son). The reality with the creed is that many times in the East the Eastern church need to use what they claim as "Western Latin additions" to the creed to combat the heresies in the East.

In all truth East and West was not separated on mass but it was started by patriarchal representatives of the bishop of Rome and the bishop of Constantinople. One excomunicated the other hence the separation we have today.

Finally do a search on the council of Florence and discovery how the Eastern Orthodox for a short period of time during the high middle ages 14th century I think returned to full communion with the Bishop of Rome.

Answer 5

I see that most people here have a Catholic bias. I'll give you the Orthodox standpoint:

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/greatschism.aspx

http://orthodoxwiki.org/Great_Schism

I've noticed that you correctly pointed out that the Roman Catholic Church separated from the Orthodox Church, and not the other way around.

Oh, I forgot the differences. Well, you pick what it's useful from here (a list of links for Roman Catholics enquiring into Orthodoxy; many articles have important points).

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/inq_rc.aspx

Answer 6

In 1054, followers of Eastern Christianity split from the Roman Catholic Church due to a few factors. One was papal authority. The followers of Eastern Christianity viewed his authority as honorary, and not literal, and that the pope did not have precedence over ecumenical councils. Another reason was the filioque clause. The filioque clause is part of the Nicene Creed, which reads "...and [from] the Son...". Catholics believe the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, while in Eastern Orthodoxy, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father only. Another factor causing the split was the Balkans, and whether the Eastern Church or Western Church had justification over the area. Another dispute was over the supremacy of the Pope over other Patriarchs and Bishops.

Answer 7

There are Orthodox church homes that note of the Pope as head of the Church on earth. The Russian Orthodox and Greek Orthodox as an party do no longer note of the Pope as Head of the Church yet in straight forward words as first between equals. The Greek Orthodox and Russian Orthodox have valid Apostolic succession and sacraments. they don't seem Catholic in that they are truly nationwide church homes and are not in Union with the Pope.

Answer 8

The split occured in 1054, but had been growing for some time - thier languages (Greek vs. Latin), practices and political relationships were different. Primarily, the Patriarch of Constantinople disagreed with the Latin rendering of the Nicean Creed, the way Rome called for universal clerical celebacy, and the celebration of the Eucharist with unleavened bread.

In 1054 Pope Leo IX sent Cardinal Humbert (who didn't speak Greek) to negotiate. Instead, Humbert took it upon himself to excommuniate the clerics at the Haggia Sophia.

Answer 9

Pride and power clothed in belief are the reasons.
The differences are ethnic, national, transitional with the Reformation, and adaptive to the particular worship group.

Answer 10

Ah, well there was an argument among the Cardinals about who clogged the pooper. Things got heated. Accusations were made. Half up and left for Rome. The rest is history.