|
Author
|
Topic: Was the Eastern Orthodox ever a Roman Catholic entity
|
INRI
unregistered
|
posted
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gospel_Syntax:
Quite honestly, the real church went underground at the creation of the Holy Roman Empire when the Catholic Church began persecuting Christians who would not bow to the crown (Constantine) and the authority of the Catholic Church of Rome.
Gospel_Syntax,
Thanks for the reply, but I think you may have Church history confused ... as I understand it the Roman Empire persecuted Christians UNTIL the 4th century when Emperor Constantine converted to Catholicism and ended the Christian persecutions. History does not bear out your claim that the real church went underground at that point, please feel free to expound on this idea if you feel differently. I implore you to study the early [ante-Nicene] Church fathers so that you can see what they truly believed about the faith [before it was supposedly corrupted by the Catholic Church], especially the Apostolic fathers like St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Clement of Rome, St. Polycarp who learned the faith DIRECTLY from the Apostles [Ss. Peter, Paul and John] and those who came soon after like St. Justin Martyr and St. Iraeneus, here is a good source ~ http://www.newadvent.org/fathers ~ there are more.
Orthodox Christians split, I am guessing here, over a schism of marriages for priests and other church doctrine. The Catholic Encyclopedia explains alot concerning the split.
The schism is known as the Great Schism of 1054 even though there is no defined date for this schism for it occurred over centuries with subsequent attempts to reunite. As the Catholic and Orthodox Churches stand today, we share 99.5% of the same doctrine even though we have been apart for almost 1000 years [this shows that the doctrine of these Churches has been preserved throughout the ages]. The schism mainly dealt with the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome over the Eastern Patriarches. The Orthodox always saw the The Pope / Bishop of Rome / Patriarch of the West / Successor to St. Peter as their "big brother" or "first in honor" or "first amongst equals" but in application they definitely acknowledged his universal jurisdiction because in the early Church they often appealed to Rome for the final say when they were mired in heresy as the East often was. So the short answer is YES, the Catholic and Orthodox Churches make up the Church that JESUS established.
IP: Logged | 
|
|
|
|
Gospel_Syntax
Advanced Member
Member # 2252
|
posted
Quite honestly, the real church went underground at the creation of the Holy Roman Empire when the Catholic Church began persecuting Christians who would not bow to the crown (Constantine) and the authority of the Catholic Church of Rome. Orthodox Christians split, I am guessing here, over a schism of marriages for priests and other church doctrine. The Catholic Encyclopedia explains alot concerning the split.
--------------------
Gospel_Syntax
Posts: 21 | From: Wyoming | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
RioLion
unregistered
|
posted
INRI states in the forum "Different Denominations" that it was the Eastern Orthodox Church that broke away from Rome - that the EOC was at one time recognized Rome as the ultimate authority.
Do we have an Orthodox on this forum to comment on this?
From \Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia, we have the following - I would really love to hear from someone of the Orthodox faith as to whether they were Roman Catholic at one time and whether it was the Orthodox that broke from Rome or the other way around.
Between Constantinople and Rome, tensions periodically arose after the 4th century. After the fall of Rome (476) to Germanic invaders, the Roman pope was the only guardian of Christian universalism in the West. He began more explicitly to attribute his primacy to Rome’s being the burial place of Saint Peter, whom Jesus had called the “rock” on which the church was to be built (see Matthew 16:18). The Eastern Christians respected that tradition and attributed to the Roman bishop a measure of moral and doctrinal authority. They believed, however, that the canonical and primatial rights of individual churches were determined above all by historical considerations. Thus, the patriarchate of Constantinople understood its own position to be determined exclusively by the fact that Constantinople, the “new Rome,” was the seat of the Roman emperor and the Senate.
The two interpretations of primacy—“apostolic” in the West, “pragmatic” in the East—coexisted for centuries, and tensions were resolved in a conciliar way. Eventually, however, conflicts led to permanent schism. In the 7th century the universally accepted creed was interpolated in Spain with the Latin word filioque, meaning “and from the Son,” thus rendering the creed as “I believe … in the Holy Spirit … who proceeds from the Father and the Son.” The interpolation, initially opposed by the popes, was promoted in Europe by Charlemagne (crowned emperor in 800) and his successors. Eventually, it was also accepted in Rome in about 1014. The Eastern church, however, considered the interpolation heretical. Moreover, other issues became controversial: For instance, the ordination of married men to the priesthood and the use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist. Secondary in themselves, these conflicts could not be resolved because the two sides followed different criteria of judgment: The papacy considered itself the ultimate judge in matters of faith and discipline, whereas the East invoked the authority of councils, where the local churches spoke as equals.
It is often assumed that the anathemas exchanged in Constantinople in 1054 between the patriarch Michael Cerularius and papal legates marked the final schism. The schism, however, actually took the form of a gradual estrangement, beginning well before 1054 and culminating in the sack of Constantinople by Western Crusaders in 1204.
In the late medieval period, several attempts made at reunion, particularly in Lyons (1274) and in Florence (1438-1439), ended in failure. The papal claims to ultimate supremacy could not be reconciled with the conciliar principle of Orthodoxy, and the religious differences were aggravated by cultural and political misunderstandings. ![[BooHoo]](graemlins/boohoo.gif)
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 2002. © 1993-2001 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
