We are not a living body that contains a soul

We are a living soul that dwells within a body!

Thursday, September 13, 2007

The Photian Schism:

In the ninth century the split widens further when the missionary ambitions of the two communions clashed over the Christianization of Bulgaria and Moravia. The election of Patriarch Photius even caused a temporary division which came to be known as the “Photian Schism.” But it was the coronation of Charlemagne as emperor by the pope and the revival in 800 of a western “Roman Empire” which best illustrate how far the gulf had widened. For the East, the West was acting as if the Roman Empire, with its legitimate emperor in Constantinople, had ceased to exist. The Byzantine Empire’s claim to world sovereignty was being ignored. Charlemagne’s new “empire” was usurping the legitimate role of the Roman Empire in Constantinople. This was a threat to the unity of Christendom and, indirectly, the shared faith of the one Church.

These historical facts no longer exist today, yet the schism continues. We must continue the search for the ultimate root cause of the schism in the intellectual and theological differences rather than in the political, geographical, or historical factors. Two basic problems were involved, the primacy of the bishop of Rome and the procession of the Holy Spirit. These doctrinal novelties were first openly discussed in Photius’ Patriarchate. To repeat, by the fifth century Christendom was divided into five sees with Rome holding the primacy of honor. This was determined by canonical decision and did not entail hegemony (one having complete leadership over another) of anyone local church or patriarchate over the others. For all of that, during the progressive split noted above, Rome began to interpret her primacy in terms of sovereignty, as a God-given right involving universal jurisdiction over the Church. Thus, the collegial and conciliar nature of the Church was gradually abandoned by the West in favor of supremacy of unlimited papal power over the entire Church. These ideas were given final systematic expression in the West during the Gregorian Reform movement of the eleventh century. Rome’s understanding of the nature of Episcopal power was in direct violation of the Church’s essentially conciliar structure. The ecclesiologies of the East and the West were mutually antithetical making subsequent attempts to heal the schism and bridge the divisions, a failure. Rome insisted on basing its claims to “true and proper jurisdiction” (as it was put at the Vatican Council of 1870) on St. Peter. This Roman exegesis of Mathew 16:18 was unknown to the Fathers who had ruled on the Church’s organization. For them, St. Peter’s primacy could never be the exclusive prerogative of anyone bishop. All bishops must, like St. Peter, confess Jesus as the Christ and, as such, all are Peter’s successors. To believe other wise would be to violate the bishops’ charismatic equality; no one can hold a position superior to that of the others.

Equally upsetting to the Orthodox East was the western interpretation of the procession of the Holy Spirit. Like the primacy issue, this also developed gradually and entered the Creed in the West almost unnoticed. This theologically complex issue involved the addition by the West of the Latin phrase “Filioque” (“and from the Son”) to the Creed. The original Creed which was sanctioned by the synods and still used by the Orthodox Church today did not contain this phrase; the text simply states “the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, proceeds from the Father.” The Latin phrase was unacceptable to the Byzantines since it implied that the Spirit now had two sources of procession, the Father and the Son, rather than the Father alone. In short, the balance between the three persons of the Trinity was altered. The Orthodox Church, then as now, believes that this is theologically indefensible. In addition to the dogmatic issue raised by the Filioque, the Byzantines argued that the phrase had been added unilaterally and, therefore illegitimately, since the East had never been consulted. Only another ecumenical synod could introduce such an alteration. The synods which had drawn up the original Creed, had expressly forbidden any subtraction or addition to the text of the Creed.

I humbly hope and pray that you will accept this news with love and understanding. Reflect on its truth. Research it with an open mind in order to see the truth and if in fact any part of these letters that touches on any teaching that you are currently receiving and is shown to you to be true,

Then you will give up yourself, your pride, and your ego in this area and give it to the truth of Jesus Christ and change your life accordingly.

This is sent with the love of Christ for you from me.

As always, all comments and questions are welcome, send them to me at;

monkmichael@newwarriorministries.com.

Monk Michael

A humble servant of Jesus Christ

On the Web at: http://www.newwarriorministries.com

Email: monkmichael@newwarriorministries.com

Phone: (803) 377-1244

Chester, SC

To unsubscribe from this email, click here and hit send;

you will be immediately dropped from our mailing list.