Eastern Orthodox – Roman Catholic ecclesiastical differences in the context of "East–West Schism"

⭐ In the context of the East–West Schism, which of the following theological or ecclesiastical disagreements was NOT explicitly cited as a contributing factor to the growing divide between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church?

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Eastern Orthodox – Roman Catholic ecclesiastical differences

Several differences exist within the organizational structures and governance of the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. These are distinguished from theological differences which are differences in dogma and doctrine. A number of disagreements over matters of ecclesiology developed slowly between the Western and Eastern wings of the State church of the Roman Empire centered upon the cities of Rome (considered to have fallen in 476) and New Rome/Constantinople (also considered to have "fallen" in 1453) respectively. The disputes were a major factor in the formal East-West Schism between Pope Leo IX and Patriarch Michael I in 1054 and are largely still unresolved between the churches today.

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<

👉 Eastern Orthodox – Roman Catholic ecclesiastical differences in the context of East–West Schism

The East–West Schism, also known as the Great Schism or the Schism of 1054, is the break of communion between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church since 1054. A series of ecclesiastical differences, theological disputes and geopolitical tensions between the Greek East and Latin West preceded the formal split that occurred in 1054. Prominent among these were the procession of the Holy Spirit (Filioque), whether leavened or unleavened bread should be used in the Eucharist, iconoclasm, the coronation of Charlemagne as emperor of the Romans in 800, the pope's claim to universal jurisdiction, and the place of the See of Constantinople in relation to the pentarchy.

The first action that led to a formal schism occurred in 1053 when Patriarch Michael I Cerularius of Constantinople ordered the closure of all Latin churches in Constantinople. In 1054, the papal legate sent by Leo IX travelled to Constantinople in order, among other things, to deny Cerularius the title of "ecumenical patriarch" and insist that he recognize the pope's claim to be the head of all of the churches. The main purposes of the papal legation were to seek help from the Byzantine emperor, Constantine IX Monomachos, in view of the Norman conquest of southern Italy, and to respond to Leo of Ohrid's attacks on the use of unleavened bread and other Western customs, attacks that had the support of Cerularius. The historian Axel Bayer says that the legation was sent in response to two letters, one from the emperor seeking help to organize a joint military campaign by the eastern and western empires against the Normans, and the other from Cerularius. When the leader of the legation, Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida, O.S.B., learned that Cerularius had refused to accept the demand, he excommunicated him, and in response Cerularius excommunicated Humbert and the other legates. According to Kallistos Ware, "Even after 1054 friendly relations between East and West continued. The two parts of Christendom were not yet conscious of a great gulf of separation between them ... The dispute remained something of which ordinary Christians in East and West were largely unaware".

↓ Explore More Topics
In this Dossier