What divided East and West in the Great Schism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter wmscott
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I know that that is not the case because I trust in eastern tradition, but the little I know about icons seems suspiciously close to idolatry, from the Catholic point of view. If you simply transplanted the eastern idea of iconography into the Catholic tradition of sacred objects, you could easily end up with a whole mess of heresies. That works both ways.
I vehemently disagree. The full ramifications of the Incarnation absolutely vindicate every element of Byzantine Christianity’s use of icons.
I am certain that the tradition of icons as practiced in the East can be transplanted to Catholicism, but a lot of things would need to be reworked and retaught in order to make it work for the common people.
Gosh, I don’t think so at all. I see a round peg and a round hole of equal size here.
 
Tony the mad;12018091:
Apostolic Churches
The Catholic Church in its literature often represents the early church as being Catholic. When compared the Protestant denominations it is perfectly true. But it is incorrect in that there are many church traditions that all are faithful to that early Church and are derived from it. The Catholic Churches accept that all of these Apostolic Churches have the fullness of truth and are not heretical. The Eastern Orthodox Churches, the Church which are out of Communion with Rome, but accept the first 7 Ecumenical Councils, represent the largest group of such Apostolic Churches, followed by the Oriental Orthodox, which accept the first 3 Ecumenical Councils; the smallest Apostolic Church is the Church of the East, which accept the first 2 Ecumenical Councils. The Catholic Church accepts that we should not try to convert members of any of the Apostolic Churches, but will accept individuals who choose to convert out of God’s moving their conviction toward union.

Patriarchs and Popes

The early Church represented three Sees of Bishops as being primary or being called Patriarchs (the term Pope can be used for any of these Patriarchs and of the later Patriarchs). The original patriarchs held Sees in Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria. (Jerusalem had a prominence as well; although it was a spiritual one. From the beginning the Patriarch of Rome asserted ‘primacy’ which the other Patriarchs were (and still are) willing to accept to an extent (but certainly not to the extent that Rome wished or asserted). When Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire to Constantinople, the Bishop of Constantinople asserted its authority to treated as Patriarch.

**Churches in Communion with Rome ******

For historical reasons with lots of injustices (both secular and religious) on both sides. The Churches gradually split in tradition and unfortunately in whether they accept the communion of the other. (The Catholic church accepts that the Orthodox Church’s Communion is truly the body and blood of Christ but that Catholics should follow the disciplines of their own Church and the laws of the Orthodox Church).

There are various Eastern Churches in the Catholic Communion that are in communion with each other, and are therefore just as Catholic as any other Church including the largest Church that is directly under the Bishop of Rome. (This can be called the Latin Church and it is by far the biggest Church in the Catholic Communion.) These Church have their own Patriarch, Catholicos, Major Archbishop, Metropolitan, Archbishop, or Bishop who is head and father of their Church, and also accepts the Pope’s role as Universal head of the Catholic Communion. The traditions of these Churches are much more close to the traditions of the Church from which they separated from and reunited to Communion with the Bishop of Rome - either Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox or Church of the East.

Similarities

There are many similarities between the Apostolic Churches. (This is particularly true when compared to the Protestant Churches). We all accept the Trinity and the importance of the Sacraments, and the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. We all accept Saints as important agents in the life of the Church. The Catholic Church believes that all the fundamental beliefs of any Christian Church are fully present in all of these Churches. The converse is true as well, presumably, that the fundamental truth of the Christian faith is a subset of all that the Apostolic Churches have in common. Many in the Orthodox Churches (and unfortunately some in the Catholic Church) are not so ‘charitable’.

Differences

The Catholic Church accepts a wide variety of differences in the traditions between the Churches which are not ‘fundamental dogma’ (from the Catholic perspective) which are nonetheless important for that tradition. (Think of it as in some places you drive on the right and other places you drive on the left. Both are valid within the area where they apply and must be followed rigorously within that ‘tradition’ without mixing the ‘traditions’; nonetheless neither is ‘fundamental’.)

The ‘Latin Church’ is the only one that demands celibacy of all its priests although celibacy is esteemed in the other Apostolic Churches. All Bishops are chosen from the celibate monks in all Apostolic Churches. Baptism, Confirmation, and Communion are often received as at once while infants. (This may be important if a child from a different Catholic Church approaches for communion; although the means of accepting communion may be very different as well.)

Catholic vs Orthodoxy

The term Catholic means ‘universal’ as well as ‘complete’ and ‘of the whole’.

The term ‘Orthodox’ roughly means ‘true worship/faith’.

The term ‘Latin’ and ‘Greek’ are sometimes used to distinguish the differences in two Traditions, but many more exist including Chaldean, Syriac, Malankara, Malabar, Armenian, Ethiopian, Coptic, etc. (Catholics include Churches of All these Traditions). This reflects the fact that in the early Church the Eastern part of the Roman Empire spoke Greek (the language of the New Testament), the Eastern non-Roman parts used Syriac, Armenian, etc and used it in their liturgies while the Western Roman part usually used Latin.

Thank you for this explanation. it really helps.
 
Unification

From a Catholic point of view, a reunification of the Churches (note that there are multiple Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches under different Patriarchs) would be a great boon to the Church. It would help give a moral boost to all of the Churches involved. It would give a stronger moral authority vs Protestants.

From a personal point of view a reunification of All Apostolic Churches would help the Catholic Church to become more orthodox AND it would help the Orthodox churches to become more ‘universal’. Both could benefit from the strength of the other while reducing their weaknesses.

I changed some things for you to make it more accurate.
At the risk of causing an argument here, which is certainly not my intention, am I correct in assuming that there exists an attitude of inflexibility in who needs to be right, who needs to be in charge, and whose traditions are right? it seems to me that east and west are both apostolic churches have the sacraments, and other similarities, basically the same church in a way. Then why such hard feelings and unwillingness to be one if none other than pride and stubbornness by both churches.
 
…am I correct in assuming that there exists an attitude of inflexibility in who needs to be right, who needs to be in charge, and whose traditions are right? it seems to me that east and west are both apostolic churches have the sacraments, and other similarities, basically the same church in a way. Then why such hard feelings and unwillingness to be one if none other than pride and stubbornness by both churches.
Exactly, just like I mentioned at the beginning of this thread, even my teenage daughter sees the real problems, its egos and politics, but the same faith.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top