Are the Greek Orthodox in schism with the Church of Rome or is Rome in schism with the Greek Orthodox?

Answer 1

The word orthodox, from the Greek ortho ('right', 'correct') and doxa ('thought', 'teaching', 'glorification'), is typically used to refer to the correct worship. The defenition of the word says it all. The Pope went against all the othe Ecumenical Patriarchs of his time and was vitually a religious tyrrants because he would not allow his thoughts to be discussed as agreed prior. so you decided. be Catholic and worship the word of the pope or be Orthodox and worship the "Word" of our Lord Jesus Christ

Answer 2

I am Orthodox, and I believe that Rome strayed away from the true course, which the Orthodox Church is still following.

It is a popular notion in the West to see the Roman Church as somehow more legitimate than the Orthodox Church.
At the beginning, they were all equal. Rome decided that it should be above the others.

As for your question: A schism is a divide. A schism exists...there is no such thing as one side being "in schism".

Answer 3

I ought to assume which you propose the schism between Rome and the church homes of the eastern Roman Empire that later grew to grow to be common because of the fact the eastern Orthodox Church, AKA the Holy Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church, or only the Orthodox Church. They have been constantly "the church", and weren't created by utilising the schism. there have been 2 common components: a million) the placement of the Pope. on an analogous time as the church homes of the east popular the pope as "first between equals", their information did not comprise the pope ruling each and every of the bishops. The patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem have been and proceed to be to on the present time useful to be in cost of their own bishops and church homes, and don't desire the pope to rule over them. those 4 have been interior the eastern Roman Empire, and labored jointly in a nicely mannered way. Rome replaced into the lone ecclesiastical means interior the Western Roman Empire, and got here to make certain its rightful place interior the West as additionally utilising to the East. The East did not agree. 2) The Roman addition to the Nicene Creed -- the "filioque clause". The universally approved Creed from 325 advert and 381 advert states that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from the father". The Romans extra the word "and the Son" to the version used interior the West. The East sees this addition as pointless and theologically incorrect. advantages. /Orthodox

Answer 4

Peace be with you my friends.

As an Oriental Orthodox Christian and one who seems to be slightly more up to date on official positions regarding this question forgive my boldness please in stating that I believe I may be able to provide an unbiased view.

The current official position of both sides (so I believe from what I've read) is that they recognise that the nature of the schism is mutual. The mutual anathamas have now been lifted (praise the Lord) and they are working towards reuniting their branches of the Church.

However historically, Rome changed the Creed so please don't blame the Orthodox.

The Oriental Orthodox and also longing to unite the Church and indeed we are very close to reuniting with the Eastern Orthodox. The Syrians (OO) and Antiochians (EO) are already in inter-communion and last I heard the Russians (EO) and Copts (OO) were discussing entering into such an arrangement as both sides are becoming tired of waiting for the last few Greeks to realise that our differences are laregly symantic only. Of course the matter of condemning the others saints needs a little work too though.

Thank you and pray for me please.

Answer 5

In 1054, Rome was considered a backwards, uncultured dirty city in the outskirts of civilization, whereas Constantinople was considered to be in the center of civilization. Thus, for cultural and political reasons, the Archbishop of Constantinople did not want to be under the authority of the Bishop of Rome.

Answer 6

That would depend purely on whether you are standing on the banks of the Tiber River or the Bosporus River. ;-)

As an Anglican, who stands on the Via Media (the "middle way") - I would say that the Schism is two-sided. Remember, in 1054 A.D., the Writs of Excommunication were pre-written and the Pope had the Archbishop of Constantinople excommunicated...and the Archbishop also excommunicated the Pope.

I say, it's a schism, and it's wrong and it breaks Our Lord's heart.

Answer 7

The authentic church, precisely as it was originally constituted by Jesus Christ, subsists in what is known today as the Roman Catholic Church, just as it always has, from the beginning.

All the others, including the Greek Orthodox, are lacking to some degree, due to their separation from the Latin church, which remains one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic, and which also remains subject to the rule of the Pope.

Answer 8

You will get a different answer depending on whether you ask an Orthodox Christian or a Catholic.

Both consider the other to be in schism.

I ask you, where is the unity that Christ foretold? "There shall be one fold and one shepherd."

The Catholic Magesterium provides doctrinal unity. In the Orthodox Church there is much division and no one voice to settle disputes.

Pax Vobiscum+

Answer 9

If you're interested, this is a popular forum for Orthodox Christians, you may find more answers here...

http://christianforums.com/f145-the-ancient-way-eastern-orthodox.html

Answer 10

The Greek Orthodox broke away from the Church of Rome. Clearly, the one true Church is the Catholic Church because God so ordained it when he said to Peter, "upon this rock I will build my church."