Who was really to blame for the east-west schism and can it be reversed?

[commenter]

Catholics and Buddhists have stood together and as well Catholics and Hindus have stood together. But I don’t see how that is relevant to the question of who was to blame for the east west schism.

There are really two subtopics in the Thread title. Most posters have focused on the first several words, and that is ok. I am not, in anyway, denying the importance of the historic events from centuries ago, many people have posted on.

Looking at the thread’s last few words, the second subtopic, I am also thinking that history is still going on. Catholic and EO families are also affected by **recent **history, including government and media in the US and many other countries taking an adversarial stance against both Catholic and Eastern Orthodox beliefs. This may affect how RCC and EO families feel about cooperating with each other, and with some other Christians whose beliefs are also under attack.

 

[antunesaa]

I didn’t see anything about Jasenovac concentration camp and the torture and murder of thousands of Serbian Orthodox civilians by Croatian Catholic clergy during WWII? For example, in a battle led or accompanied by the Roman Catholic clergyman Father Miroslav Filipovic on 7 February 1942, 2300 Serb civilians, men, women and children, in the settlement of Drakulić, on the northern outskirts of Banja Luka, and in two neighbouring villages, Motike and Šargovac were brutally killed, usually with axes or pick-axes. According to reports at a school in Šargovac Father Filipović took a child, Vasilija Glamočanin, and “slaughtered her with a knife” in front of the class. He urged the Ustaša troops who accompanied him to deal similarly with the other children and assured them that he would take the sin upon himself. “As each child passed, an Ustaša would gouge out an eye” etc. Similar atrocities occurred on 12 February 1942 at two more villages in the area, Piskavica and Ivanjska.
A Jewish prisoner Mr. Egon Berger, in his book, “44 months in Jasenovac” describes some of the killings that took place there:
“The priestly face of Fra Majstorovic, all made-up and powdered, dressed in an elegant suit an green hunter’s hat, watched with delight the victims. He approached the children, even stroked their heads. The company was joined Ljubo Milos and Ivica Matkovic. Fra Majstorovic told the mothers there will now will be a baptism for their children. They took the children from the mothers, the child whom Father Majstorovic was carrying, in his child’s innocence caressed the painted face of his killer. The mothers, distraught, perceived the situation. They offered their lives for mercy for the children. Two children were placed on the ground, while the third was thrown like a ball into the air, and Fr Majstorovic , holding a dagger upwards, missed three times, while the fourth time with a joke and a laugh, a child was impaled on the dagger. Mothers began throwing themselves on the ground, pulling their hair, and began to shout terribly. Ustasha guards of the 14th Osijek Company took them away and killed them. When all three children were so brutally killed, these three two-legged beasts exchanged money, because they seem to have a bet on who would the first to stick a dagger in a child.”
Berger, Egon (1966). 44 mjeseca u Jasenovcu. Zagreb: Nakladni zavod Hrvatske. p. 57.
Why were so many Jews and Serbian Orthodox placed in the Jasenovac concentration camp?

This is a testimony of an atrocity committed by a specially sadistic and mean priest. The point you should be making is whether there was any kind of direction from Rome to do such barbaric activities. I am sure there wasn’t. By the gory description, the man was a beast inebriated by a lust for blood and memories of massacres starting 1000 years before. I really can’t see the point of your post other than documenting an historical fact. Do you mean the filioque has turned the Western Church a horde of assassins? Do you want to imply that the episode you describe was willed by the Western Church, or episodes of the opposite sign (whose description I am also not very interested in) are willed by the Eastern Church?

I pray for the reunification of Eastern and Western Christianity. We are disserving Our Lord Jesus Christ with this unbearable stream of recriminations.

 

[antunesaa]

True, but if the Catholic church cannot unite with SSPX, then I don’t see how it could unite with the Eastern Orthodox.

Much more is at stake. So the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church should have much stronger incentives to strike a deal for reunification. We all owe that to Our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Jon_Mallory]

Much more is at stake. So the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church should have much stronger incentives to strike a deal for reunification. We all owe that to Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Strike a deal? Both our hierarchs are men of faith, not opportunistic businessmen looking to make an alliance that suits our common interests.

 

[steve_b]

Why do the Greek Orthodox prefer to live under Islamic rule than under the Roman Catholics,*** except that the Sultan treated them better?***

Let’s examine that to test if that notion is true

When you made the point about Hagia Sophia I posted the following #26

Re: Hagia Sophia, the flagship of Churches for the Orthodox, became a mosque by its ultimate captors.

Hagia Sophia Facts, Hagia Sophia Info , Mosque Of Sultans

So to your point, I would suggest, thinking of this in reverse. Can one imagine Rome being conquered by Muslims, and St Peter’s in Rome turned into a mosque? And Rome in extension wouldn’t be called Rome anymore but some other name, and Christianity would have no rights… in fact it ended up being on life support?

 

[Ridgerunner]

This really depends on who you ask, one could argue that the East was in a politically week spot ever since the first crusades where the Alexios asked for help to begin with. It was bound to fall sooner or later. I think even if the unity would have happened the Muslim horde’s onslaught would have been too great to resist effectively.

Many eastern hierarchs accented to the union and some were genuinely willing to sacrifice everything for unity.

Regardless of history, it is clear that none of us will tell history from the others perspective, and most importantly none of us need to carry secular politics into the area of our faith.

We need a council where Bishops of East and West meet and objectively look at what exactly is enough to actually condemn one side of being heterodox, what actually constitutes as a significant deviation from the faith of the apostles and what can be interpreted as acceptable local tradition.

As to your first point, I think you’re right. The Crusader sack of Constantinople was at the hands of 8,000 largely Frankish knights. The later Ottoman siege force was 200,000 who had cannon the Frankish knights did not have.

Christian forces did try to come to the rescue. A largely Hungarian force tried to turn back the Turks, but was disastrously defeated and the Turks took Hungary itself. The Ottomans were an exceedingly strong force at the time, and very nearly took the whole West.

But some Orthodox still blame the Latins for the loss of Constantinople.

I honestly don’t think the present separation is so much a matter of doctrine as it is of territoriality. Orthodoxy is territorial, and far and away most Orthodox on earth are Eastern Orthodox under the Patriarch of Moscow. Eastern Orthodoxy does not grant Catholicism the “authority” to even be in the Americas, Asia or Africa, and certainly nowhere in Europe except the City of Rome and its immediate environs.

The schism was largely political at its beginning, and it still is.

 

[benjamindt]

Of course it can be reversed. Any willing adult can join RCIA at any time and become a Catholic.

 

[Jon_Mallory]

Of course it can be reversed. Any willing adult can join RCIA at any time and become a Catholic.

Yes, and in their RCIA classes, they should read the official church documents that promote dialogue between the two–not proselytism. Catholics need to respect the East. Seriously, your comment is not in line with the mind of your own Church.

 

[benjamindt]

You can become a Catholic by going to a faith formation class in a non-Catholic Church?

btw, your comment reeks of disrespect and i find it hilarious that you’re chastising me for announcing that there is a path for entry into the Church.

Firstly, I don’t think you have a misunderstanding for what “proselytize” means.

Secondly, I mention RCIA because of concern for the soul of those outside the Church. We should all want everyone to fully become part of Christ’s Church, for the sake of souls.

Thirdly, Christ calls us to leave everything behind and come to Him. I don’t know what you are saying by “respect the east”. Of all the rites in Catholicism, 22 of the 23 are eastern rites. The statement that Catholics need to respect the east is a folly as the Church is Eastern in its roots and foundation.

Fourthly and finally, If “my Church” thought it was wrong to have people come into the Church through RCIA in a Catholic Church, then why do they offer it?

 

[lewevanhoop]

Isn’t an argument over such a minor point of theology which has nothing to do with salvation, justification, or sanctification that has gone on for over 1,000 years just a bit excessive especially in light of the scandal it has caused the church. The issues of papal infallability and Jurisdiction are however much trickier and of course recognition of the councils after the schism.

 

[benjamindt]

if it was, there’d be reconciliation and a return back to the Church. People like their ways, they like their power. Maybe we just need some humble patriarchs. Maybe it’s pride, power, etc. that is blocking their return.

 

[SyroMalankara]

You can become a Catholic by going to a faith formation class in a non-Catholic Church?

btw, your comment reeks of disrespect and i find it hilarious that you’re chastising me for announcing that there is a path for entry into the Church.

Firstly, I don’t think you have a misunderstanding for what “proselytize” means.

Secondly, I mention RCIA because of concern for the soul of those outside the Church. We should all want everyone to fully become part of Christ’s Church, for the sake of souls.

Thirdly, Christ calls us to leave everything behind and come to Him. I don’t know what you are saying by “respect the east”. Of all the rites in Catholicism, 22 of the 23 are eastern rites. The statement that Catholics need to respect the east is a folly as the Church is Eastern in its roots and foundation.

Fourthly and finally, If “my Church” thought it was wrong to have people come into the Church through RCIA in a Catholic Church, then why do they offer it?

RCIA is not necessary for Orthodox and other Apostolic Eastern Church members, read the documents of your own church. Its nice if Easterners want to go just to learn, but wholly not required

 

[SyroMalankara]

if it was, there’d be reconciliation and a return back to the Church. People like their ways, they like their power. Maybe we just need some humble patriarchs. Maybe it’s pride, power, etc. that is blocking their return.

And lack of proper understanding, as some comments here show

 

[Jon_Mallory]

You can become a Catholic by going to a faith formation class in a non-Catholic Church?

btw, your comment reeks of disrespect and i find it hilarious that you’re chastising me for announcing that there is a path for entry into the Church.

Firstly, I don’t think you have a misunderstanding for what “proselytize” means.

Secondly, I mention RCIA because of concern for the soul of those outside the Church. We should all want everyone to fully become part of Christ’s Church, for the sake of souls.

Thirdly, Christ calls us to leave everything behind and come to Him. I don’t know what you are saying by “respect the east”. Of all the rites in Catholicism, 22 of the 23 are eastern rites. The statement that Catholics need to respect the east is a folly as the Church is Eastern in its roots and foundation.

Fourthly and finally, If “my Church” thought it was wrong to have people come into the Church through RCIA in a Catholic Church, then why do they offer it?

Wow, you’ve misunderstood my post so spectacularly I don’t even know where to begin. What you wrote is akin to an orthodox writing, “yeah, we can end the schism if everyone gets chrismated into the Orthodox Church”. Would that be a helpful response? No- because it’s saying all you need to do is convert.

 

[Vico]

Isn’t an argument over such a minor point of theology which has nothing to do with salvation, justification, or sanctification that has gone on for over 1,000 years just a bit excessive especially in light of the scandal it has caused the church. The issues of papal infallability and Jurisdiction are however much trickier and of course recognition of the councils after the schism.

And the difference of second and third penitential (without annulment) marriages present a difficulty.

One document identifies difficulties: The Filioque: A Church Dividing Issue?: An Agreed Statement

“If “theology” is understood in its Patristic sense, as reflection on God as Trinity, the theological issue behind this dispute is whether the Son is to be thought of as playing any role in the origin of the Spirit, as a hypostasis or divine “person,” from the Father, who is the sole ultimate source of the divine Mystery.”

“… Orthodox theology has regarded the ultimate approval by the Popes, in the eleventh century, of the use of Filioque in the Latin Creed as a usurpation of the dogmatic authority proper to ecumenical Councils alone, Catholic theology has seen it as a legitimate exercise of his primatial authority to proclaim and clarify the Church’s faith.”
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/ecumenical/orthodox/filioque-church-dividing-issue-english.cfm

 

[EIF5A]

When Jesus asked St. Faustina to pray for schismatics (changed to separated brothers now?), was He talking about the Orthodox, Protestants, or both?

Granted no private revelation is binding on all Catholics, but there’s a Divine Mercy Sunday, so that particular revelation is up there with Our Lady of Fatima and such.

Would the Orthodox be willing to be called “separated brothers”? I won’t even ask about the term schismatic.

(From what I can remember, some Orthodox are against some private revelations. Some even protest against Sts. Bernadette or Therese de Lisieux. How would this come into play for unification?)

 

[lewevanhoop]

And the difference of second and third penitential (without annulment) marriages present a difficulty.

One document identifies difficulties: The Filioque: A Church Dividing Issue?: An Agreed Statement

“If “theology” is understood in its Patristic sense, as reflection on God as Trinity, the theological issue behind this dispute is whether the Son is to be thought of as playing any role in the origin of the Spirit, as a hypostasis or divine “person,” from the Father, who is the sole ultimate source of the divine Mystery.”

“… Orthodox theology has regarded the ultimate approval by the Popes, in the eleventh century, of the use of Filioque in the Latin Creed as a usurpation of the dogmatic authority proper to ecumenical Councils alone, Catholic theology has seen it as a legitimate exercise of his primatial authority to proclaim and clarify the Church’s faith.”
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/ecumenical/orthodox/filioque-church-dividing-issue-english.cfm

The penetiential marriages, if the issues of papal infalibility and jurisdiction are addressed, would be quite easy to deal with.

 

[prodromos]

Let’s examine that to test if that notion is true

When you made the point about Hagia Sophia I posted the following #26

Re: Hagia Sophia, the flagship of Churches for the Orthodox, became a mosque by its ultimate captors.

Hagia Sophia Facts, Hagia Sophia Info , Mosque Of Sultans

So to your point, I would suggest, thinking of this in reverse. Can one imagine Rome being conquered by Muslims, and St Peter’s in Rome turned into a mosque? And Rome in extension wouldn’t be called Rome anymore but some other name, and Christianity would have no rights… in fact it ended up being on life support?

Just a little tidbit of information regarding Constantinople being renamed Istanbul. The Turks are simply using what they heard the Greeks say whenever the referred to Constantinople. For everyone in the area, Constantinople was simply “the city”, so if you were going to Constantinople you were going “to the city”, which in Greek is “eis tin poly”. In Greek, when an “n” is followed by a “p”, the “p” is pronounced as a “b”, thus to Turkish ears it would be “eis tin boly” which they shortened to “istanbul”.

 

[Vico]

The penetiential marriages, if the issues of papal infalibility and jurisdiction are addressed, would be quite easy to deal with.

And those issues have been manifest since the two eighth councils. (The Fourth Council of Constantinople of 869, and The Fourth Council of Constantinople of 879.)

 

[commenter]

Just a little tidbit of information regarding Constantinople being renamed Istanbul. The Turks are simply using what they heard the Greeks say whenever the referred to Constantinople. For everyone in the area, Constantinople was simply “the city”, so if you were going to Constantinople you were going “to the city”, which in Greek is “eis tin poly”. In Greek, when an “n” is followed by a “p”, the “p” is pronounced as a “b”, thus to Turkish ears it would be “eis tin boly” which they shortened to “istanbul”.