A question about the East–West Schism ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter missouricitizen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What does the Roman Catholic Church say about this subject.
 
There is some evidence that it did. For example, John II, patriarch of Constantinople, wrote to Hormisdas, bishop of Rome in 6th century:
Promising for the future, that whoever are separated from the communion of the Catholic Church, that is who consent not in all things with the Apostolic See, their names shall not be recited in the sacred mysteries.
Click to expand...
There is also the case of Bassianus in the 5th century. He was supposed to become bishop of Ephesus but was consecrated bishop of Evazi against his will. Later he seized the see of Ephesus by inciting a mob and held it for four years. Bassianus was charged with irregularity. He claimed that his appointment had been confirmed by Proclus, Patriarch of Constantinople, who had communicated with him as Bishop of Ephesus. The confirmation by the patriarch had the force of canonical institution and compensated irregularities and violations of canons in the election. Stephanus, his accuser, was asked how Bassianus had been removed. Stephanus replied: “Letters were likewise brought from the most blessed Pope, the most holy Bishop of Rome, that this man should not be a bishop.” Some other bishops were on the side of Bassianus, and claimed that the confirmation by Proclus made his installation firm, but Stephanus continued: “The most holy Archbishop Leo of Rome deposed him because he was made contrary to the canons.” The judgement of the council was that Bassianus had no right to hold the see.

All this is, of course, anecdotal, and someone could claim that there is not enough evidence.
 
Before the East–West Schism of 1054 did the Eastern Church consider the Pope of Rome to be the head of all of Christendom? Yes, they did.

Take a look at St. Athanasius, who was an Eastern Bishop. In one of his letters, he includes an excerpt from Pope Julius and it says:

“Why was nothing said to us (Pope Julius and the Roman Church) conerning the Church of the Alexandrians in particular? Are you ignorant that the custom has been for word to be written first to us (Rome), and then for a just decision to be passed from this place? If then any such suspicion rested upon the Bishop there, notice thereof ought to have been sent to the Church of this place (Rome); whereas, after neglecting to inform us, and proceeding on their own authority as they pleased, now they desire to obtain our concurrence in their decisions, though we never condemned him. Not so have the constitutions of Paul, not so have the traditions of the Fathers directed; this is another form of procedure, a novel practice. I beseech you, readily bear with me; what I write is for the common good. For what we have received from the blessed Apostle Peter, that I signify to you, and I should not have written this, as deeming that these things were manifest unto all men, had not these proceedings so disturbed us…Thus wrote the Council of Rome by Julius, Bishop of Rome.”
-Defense against the Arians 2, 35, NPNF2, 4:118-119

Also, Hilary of Poitiers wrote:

“And you (Pope Julius), most dearly loved brother, though absent from us in body, were present in mind concordant, and will…For this will be seen to be best, and by far the most befitting thing, if to the head, that is to the see of the Apostle Peter, the priests of the Lord report (or, refer) from every one of the provinces.”
-Epistle Sardic. Council. ad Julium

Also, Macarius of Egypt (300-390 AD) wrote:

“For of old Moses and Aaron, when this priesthood was theirs, suffered much; and Caiphas, when he had their chair, persecuted and condemned the Lord…Afterwards Moses was succeeded by Peter, who had committed to his hands the new Church of Christ, and the true priesthood.”
-Homily 26

Compare this with Exodus 18 where Moses sits in a chair and judges. He is clearly the leader of all. He appoints other men to lead the people so that he won’t have to do it alone; however, these men are to judge the small matters. The big matters are to be brought to Moses. He is clearly in authority over ALL while the others have authority over a certain amount of people.

Basil the Great wrote a letter to the Pope saying:

“It is these that we implore your diligence to denounce publicly to all the Churches of the East…I am constrained to mention them by name, in order that you may yourselves recognize those who are stirring up disturbance here, and may make them known to our churches…You, however, have all the more credit with the people, in proportion to the distance that separates your home and theirs, besides the fact that you are gifted with God’s grace to help those who are distressed.”
-Letter 263:2

Also Pope Damascus I:

“Although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primay by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior…The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the Apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it.”
-The Decree of Damascus 3

Ambrosiaster:

“Whereas the whole world is God’s, yet is the Church said to be His house, of which Pope Damasus is at this day the ruler.”
-Commentary on the Epistle of First Timothy

Regarding infallibility we can see a letter from an Eastern Father, Theodoret, who implies infallibility and explicitly talks about Rome having supremacy over all the Churches on earth:

“This most holy See has preserved the supremacy over all Churches on the earth, for one especial reason among many others; to wit, that it has remained intact from the defilement of heresy. No one has ever sat on that Chair, who has taught heretical doctrine; rather that See has ever preserved unstained the Apostolic Grace.”
-Episte 116 to Renatus

These are just a few. There are MANY more.

God bless.
 
lyrikal I can’t get your link to work for the C-Rap. My daughter and son do this though my daughter finds it a bit embarrassing, she’s younger. Since I have it “all” recorded. I told her it should make for a interesting preview a few years down the road. Just teasing of course. 😃

Peace
 
Of course it depends the way you see things in history, the places of people representing Christianity and cultural and political issues. I know that would be easier do ear an answer like: the Orthox separated (as Catholic says) or the Roman Catholic separated ( as eastern Orthodox says).
What do you pretend that after all Orthodox would tell you they are wrong or the Roman Catholic would say they are wrong?

In both field you will find enough clear evidence to justify their own reasons and mistakes.
Enough good theologians and saints and whatever you want to find you will find.

But when you justify reasons, reasons rest reason, when you justify mistakes a mistake become reason so at the end you have only good reasons from both sides.

I believe if we give men the power to separate what God created we assume men to have more power then they really have. I feel Orthodox and Roman Catholic separation is men separation justified by a lot of Philosophy and Theology to cover human weakenes.

I think both need the same ammount of forgiveness.

Attention I am not an expert but only a person that has faith in our Lord.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top