The Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church have been in a state of official schism from one another since the East–West Schism of 1054. This schism was caused by historical and language differences, and the ensuing theological differences between the Western and Eastern churches.
Although the 21st century saw a growth of anti-western sentiments with the rise of neo-Palamism, "the future of East–West rapprochement appears to be overcoming the modern polemics of neo-scholasticism and neo-Palamism".[4] Since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church has generally taken the approach that the schism is primarily ecclesiological in nature, that the doctrinal teachings of the Eastern Orthodox churches are generally sound, and that "the vision of the full communion to be sought is that of unity in legitimate diversity"[5] as before the division.[6]
The Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church have been in a state of official schism from one another since the East–West Schism of 1054. This schism was caused by historical and language differences, and the ensuing theological differences between the Western and Eastern churches.
The Byzantine Empire permanently withdrew from the City of Rome in 751, thus ending the Byzantine Papacy. The subsequent mutual alienation of the Greek-speaking East and the Latin-speaking West led to increasing ignorance of the theological and ecclesiological developments of each tradition.
The Eastern Church and the Western Church used respectively Greek and Latin as their media of communication. Translations did not always correspond exactly. This also led to misunderstandings.
Papal primacy, also known as the "primacy of the Bishop of Rome," is an ecclesiastical doctrine concerning the respect and authority that is due to the pope from other bishops and their episcopal sees.
In the Eastern Orthodox Churches, some understand the primacy of the Bishop of Rome to be merely one of greater honour, regarding him as primus inter pares ("first among equals"), without effective power over other churches.[7] A prominent 20th century Eastern Orthodox Christian theologian, Fr. Alexander Schmemann, envisioned a primacy that sums up rather than rules over: "Primacy is power, but as power it is not different from the power of a bishop in each church. It is not a higher power but indeed the same power, only expressed, manifested, and realized by one."[8]
The Catholic Church attributes to the primacy of the Pope "full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered,"[9] with a power that it attributes also to the entire body of the bishops united with the pope.[10] The power that it attributes to the pope's primatial authority has limitations that are official, legal, dogmatic, and practical.[11]
In the Ravenna Document, issued in 2007, representatives of the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church jointly stated that both East and West accept the fact of the Bishop of Rome's primacy at the universal level, but that differences of understanding exist about how the primacy is to be exercised and about its scriptural and theological foundations.[12]
Differences over this doctrine and the question of papal primacy have been and remain primary causes of schism between the Eastern Orthodox and Western churches.[1][2] The term has been an ongoing source of conflict between Eastern Christianity and Western Christianity, contributing, in major part, to the East–West Schism of 1054 and proving to be an obstacle to attempts to reunify the two sides.[13][14][15]
The Filioque clause
Filioque (literally "and [from] the Son"[16][discuss]) is a Latin term added to the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed (commonly known as the Nicene Creed), which is absent in the original Greek version. The Latin term Filioque is translated into the English clause "and the Son" in that creed:
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father ⟨and the Son⟩.
Who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified.
or in Latin:
Et in Spiritum Sanctum, Dominium et vivificantem:
qui ex Patre ⟨Filioque⟩ procedit
Qui cum Patre, et Filio simul adoratur. et cum glorificatur
Whether that term Filioque is included, as well as how it is translated and understood, can have important implications for how one understands the central Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity. For some, the term implies a serious underestimation of the Father's role in the Trinity; for others, denial of what it expresses implies a serious underestimation of the role of the Son in the Trinity. Over time, the term became a symbol of conflict between Eastern Christianity and Western Christianity, although there have been attempts at resolving the conflict. Among the early attempts at harmonization are the works of Maximus the Confessor, who notably was canonised independently by both Eastern and Western churches.
Possible linguistic resolution
In 1995, the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity (PCPU) pointed out that the Filioque conundrum may be a problem of language, rather than a problem of theology.[24] The word ἐκπορεύεσθαι in Greek indicates a primary cause or an ultimate cause; while the Latin word procedere indicates a procession but not from an ultimate cause. The Latin version may be more accurately retranslated into Greek as προϊέναι, rather than ἐκπορεύεσθαι. Metropolitan John Zizioulas declared that PCPCU position shows positive signs of reconciliation for the Filioque issue between the Eastern and Western churches.[25]
The 20th century saw the rise of neo-Palamism, c.q. "Neo-Orthodox Movement," in the Eastern Orthodox Churches. According to this point of view, which arose in defense of the Palamite distinction between essence and energia, western theology is dominated by rational philosophy, while Orthodox theology is based on the experiential vision of God and the highest truth. According to neo-Palamism, this is a main division between East and West.
Neo-Palamism has its roots in the Hesychast controversy or Palamite controversy (14th century),[26][27]
in which Gregory Palamas provided a theological justification for the centuries-old Orthodox practice of hesychasm. The hesychast controversy lead to a further distinction between East and West, giving a prominent place to the contemplative practice and theology in the Eastern Orthodox Churches. The publication in 1782 of the Philokalia, which lead to a revival of hesychasm, was accepted in particular by the Slav Orthodox churches. Together with the importance attached to it in the 20th century by the Paris school of Orthodox theology, it has "led to hesychasm's becoming definitive for modern Orthodox theology as never before,"[28][29] with its Palamite Essence–energies distinction.[30]
Rational and mystical theology
According to these modern Eastern Orthodox theologians, western theology depends too much on kataphatic theology. According to Steenberg, Eastern theologians assert that Christianity in essence is apodictic truth, in contrast to the dialectic, dianoia, or rationalised knowledge which is the arrived at truth by way of philosophical speculation.[31]
While Thomas Aquinas argued that kataphatic and apophatic theology need to balance each other, Vladimir Lossky argued, based on his reading of Dionysius the Areopagite and Maximus the Confessor, that positive theology is always inferior to negative theology.[32] According to Lossky mysticism, c.q. gnosiology, is the expression of dogmatic theology par excellence,[33] while positive theology is a step along the way to the superior knowledge attained by negation.[32] According to Lossky, the difference in East and West is due to the Catholic Church's use of pagan metaphysical philosophy, and its outgrowth, scholasticism, rather than the mystical, actual experience of God called theoria, to validate the theological dogmas of Catholic Christianity. Lossky argues that therefore the Eastern Orthodox and Catholics have become "different men,"[34] stating that "Revelation sets an abyss between the truth which it declares and the truths which can be discovered by philosophical speculation."[35]
Lossky had a strong influence on 20th century Eastern Orthodox theology, and influenced John Romanides, himself also an influential theologian on his own. Romanides saw a strong dichotomy between Eastern Orthodox and western views, arguing that the influence of the Franks, and western acceptance of Augustine's theology, is the starting point of western rational theology, and the dichotomy between East and West.[36][note 2]
This same sentiment was also expressed by the early Slavophile movements (19th century) in the works of Ivan Kireevsky and Aleksey Khomyakov. The Slavophiles sought reconciliation with all various forms of Christianity, as can be seen in the works of its most famous proponent Vladimir Solovyov.
Hesychasm, "to keep stillness," is a mystical tradition of contemplative prayer in the Eastern Orthodox Church, which already existed in the fourth century AD with the Desert Fathers. Its aim is theosis, deification obtained through the practice of contemplative prayer,[42][43][44][45][46] the first stage of theoria, leading to the "vision of God".[31][47][48][note 3] It consists of three stages, namely catharsis, theoria, and completion of deification, c.q. theosis.[43]
The Hesychast controversy was a theological dispute in the Byzantine Empire during the 14th century between supporters and opponents of Gregory Palamas. Gregory Palamas of Thessaloniki (1296-1359) provided a theological justification for the practice of hesychasm. Palamas stated that there is a distinction between the essence (ousia) and the energies (energeia) of God. While God in his essence is unknowable and indeterminable, the vision of God can be attained when his energy is seen with the eyes as the Uncreated Light. Palamas formulated his ideas on this distinction as part of his defense of the Athonitemonastic practice of hesychasmos against the charge of heresy brought by the humanist scholar and theologian Barlaam of Calabria.[65][66]
Eastern Orthodox theologians generally regard this distinction as a real distinction, and not just a conceptual distinction.[67] Historically, Western Christian thought has tended to reject the essence-energies distinction as real in the case of God, characterizing the view as a heretical introduction of an unacceptable division in the Trinity and suggestive of polytheism.[68][69]
Catholic views on Hesychasm
The later 20th century saw a change in the attitude of Catholic theologians to Palamas.[70] While some Western theologians see the theology of Palamas as introducing an inadmissible division within God, others have incorporated his theology into their own thinking,[71] maintaining that there is no conflict between his teaching and Catholic thought.[72]
Sergey S. Horujy states that "hesychast studies may provide fresh look at some old interconfessional divisions, disclosing unexpected points of resemblance",[73] and Jeffrey D. Finch says that "the future of East-West rapprochement appears to be overcoming the modern polemics of neo-scholasticism and neo-Palamism".[74]
Pope John Paul II repeatedly emphasized his respect for Eastern theology as an enrichment for the whole Church. While from a Catholic viewpoint there have been tensions concerning some developments of the practice of hesychasm, the Pope said, there is no denying the goodness of the intention that inspired its defence.[75][76]
Future directions
Jeffrey D. Finch claims that "the future of East–West rapprochement appears to be overcoming the modern polemics of neo-scholasticism and neo-Palamism".[4]
The Catholic Church considers that the differences between Eastern and Western theology are complementary rather than contradictory, as stated in the decree Unitatis redintegratio of the Second Vatican Council, which declared:
In the study of revelation East and West have followed different methods, and have developed differently their understanding and confession of God's truth. It is hardly surprising, then, if from time to time one tradition has come nearer to a full appreciation of some aspects of a mystery of revelation than the other, or has expressed it to better advantage. In such cases, these various theological expressions are to be considered often as mutually complementary rather than conflicting. Where the authentic theological traditions of the Eastern Church are concerned, we must recognize the admirable way in which they have their roots in Holy Scripture, and how they are nurtured and given expression in the life of the liturgy. They derive their strength too from the living tradition of the apostles and from the works of the Fathers and spiritual writers of the Eastern Churches. Thus they promote the right ordering of Christian life and, indeed, pave the way to a full vision of Christian truth.[77]
The Catholic Church's attitude was also expressed by Pope John Paul II in the image of the Church "breathing with her two lungs".[78][79] He meant that there should be a combination of the more rational, juridical, organization-minded "Latin" temperament with the intuitive, mystical and contemplative spirit found in the East.[80]
"The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honoured by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter" (Lumen gentium 15). Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church" (Unitatis redintegratio 3). With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fulness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist" (Paul VI, Discourse, 14 December 1975; cf. Unitatis redintegratio 13-18).[81]
On 3 July 2019, it was revealed that during a Vatican meeting with Orthodox Archbishop Job of Telmessos, who represented the Orthodox Church's Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, during the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul on 29 June 2019, Pope Francis stated that unity rather than leveling differences should be the goal between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.[84] Pope Francis also gave Bartholomew nine bone fragments which were believed to have belonged to St. Peter and which were displayed at a public Mass which was held in the Vatican in November 2013 to celebrate the "Year of Faith".[85][84] Despite holding a "cordial" meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, with whom the Pope has had a history of good relations,[86] on 4 July 2019 tensions between the Vatican and Russian Orthodox churches still remained, with Pope Francis stating that it is unlikely that he will visit Russia unless Putin agrees to not include the Russian Orthodox Church in the visit.[87] Putin also stated to the Pope that he would not invite the Pope to Russia without this condition.[88] Pope Francis also hinted that he was willing to support the concerns of Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, which has expressed opposition to both Putin's intervention in Ukraine and the Vatican's current relationship with Putin.[89]
At the beginning of a two-day Vatican meeting with Ukrainian Greek-Catholic leaders on 5 July 2019, Pope Francis hinted that he supported the Church's concerns in Ukraine and called for greater humanitarian aid to Ukraine. The Pope previously expressed dismay over the Russian Orthodox Church's role in the conflict in Ukraine in early 2019 as well.[90] During the 5 July 2019 meeting, Pope Francis also accused the Russian Orthodox Church of attempting to manipulate "other religions" in Ukraine as well.[91]
^The doctrine expressed by the Filioque is accepted by the Catholic Church,[17] by Anglicanism[18] and by Protestant churches in general.[19] Christians of these groups generally include it when reciting the Nicene Creed. Nonetheless, these groups recognize that Filioque is not part of the original text established at the First Council of Constantinople in 381 [citation needed]and they do not demand that others too should use it when saying the Creed,[citation needed] including in the Latin liturgical rites of the Latin Church.[20] the Catholic Church does not add the phrase corresponding to Filioque (καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ) to the Greek text of the Creed, where it would be associated with the verb ἐκπορεύεσθαι, but adds it in Latin, where it is associated with the verb procedere, a word of broader meaning than ἐκπορεύεσθαι, and in languages, such as English,[21] in which the verb with which it is associated also has a broader meaning than ἐκπορεύεσθαι. Pope John Paul II has recited the Nicene Creed several times with patriarchs of the Eastern Orthodox Church in Greek according to the original text.[22]
^According to Romanides, both Saint Thomas Aquinas' Aristoteleanism and Saint Augustine's Neoplatonism mislead and dominated Western theology. According to Romanides, Augustine did not have theoria, and many of his theological conclusions are not based on a personal experience of God, but on philosophical or logical speculation and conjecture.[36] Romanides therefore reveres Augustine as a saint, but says he does not qualify as a theologian in the Eastern Orthodox church.[37]
According to John Romanides the Catholic Church, starting with Augustine, has removed the mystical experience (revelation) of God (theoria) from Christianity, and replaced it with the conceptualization of revelation through the philosophical speculation of metaphysics.[38][39] Romanides does not consider the metaphysics of Augustine to be Orthodox but pagan mysticism.[38]
According to John Romanides, Augustinian theology is generally ignored in the Eastern Orthodox church.[40] According to John Romanides and George Papademetriou, some of Augustine's teachings, including his Platonic mysticism, has actually been condemned within the Eastern Orthodox condemnation of Barlaam of Calabria, at the Hesychast or Fifth Council of Constantinople 1351.[38][41][subnote 1]
^Theosis has also been referred to as "glorification",[38] "union with God", "becoming god by Grace", "self-realization", "the acquisition of the Holy Spirit", "experience of the uncreated light".[43][49]
^In classical Greek philosophy, theoria was the "intellectual vision of truth,"[53] that is, an intuitive or comprehensive understanding and vision, as opposed to a mere rational and analytical understanding. Until the sixth century the practice of what is now called mysticism was referred to by the term contemplatio, c.q. theoria.[54] According to Johnson, "[b]oth contemplation and mysticism speak of the eye of love which is looking at, gazing at, aware of divine realities."[54]
Under the influence of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite the mystical theology came to denote the investigation of the allegorical truth of the Bible,[55] and "the spiritual awareness of the ineffable Absolute beyond the theology of divine names."[56]Theoria enabled the Fathers to perceive depths of meaning in the biblical writings that escape a purely scientific or empirical approach to interpretation.[57] The Antiochene Fathers, in particular, saw in every passage of Scripture a double meaning, both literal and spiritual.[58][subnote 2][subnote 3]
^The Antiochene use of theoria respected the literal meaning of Old Testament texts, while discerning in it a typological or spiritual sense, revealing in the things narrated "the face of Christ in the Old Testament".[59] According to Beck, for Clement and other Alexandrians the word theōria denoted the spiritual sense of a passage of Scripture as revealed by allegory, and they treated it as virtually synonymous with allēgoria.[60]
^As Frances Margaret Young notes, "Best translated in this context as a type of "insight", theoria was the act of perceiving in the wording and "story" of Scripture a moral and spiritual meaning,"[61] and may be regarded as a form of allegory,[62]
In Hesychasm, theoria is obtained by contemplative prayer, the ceaseless and mindfull repetition of the Jesus Prayer.
^Schmemann, Alexander (1995). The primacy of Peter: essays in ecclesiology and the early church (1st ed.). Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press. p. 165. ISBN0-88141-125-6.
^North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation (25 October 2003). "The Filioque: a Church dividing issue?". usccb.org. Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Archived from the original on 20 February 2013. Also archived as "The Filioque: a Church-dividing issue?". Archived from the original on 6 August 2010. Retrieved 25 June 2010.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link) from scoba.us. New York: Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the Americas.
^An Overview of the Hsychastic Controversy by Archbishop Chrysostomos, English version: Archbishop Chrysostomos, Orthodox and Roman Catholic Relations from the Fourth Crusade to the Hesychastic Controversy (Etna, CA: Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, 2001), pp. 199‒232 [1]
^Archbishop Chrysostomos, Orthodox and Roman Catholic Relations from the Fourth Crusade to the Hesychastic Controversy Etna, CA: Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, 2001), pp. 199‒232 [4].
^What Is prayer? by Theophan the Recluse cited in The Art of Prayer: An Orthodox Anthology, p.73, compiled by Igumen Chariton of Valamo, trans, E. Kadloubovsky and E.M. Palmer, ed. Timothy Ware, 1966, Faber & Faber, London.
^Orthodox Psychotherapy Section The Knowledge of God according to St. Gregory Palamas by Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos published by Birth of Theotokos Monastery, Greece (January 1, 2005) ISBN978-960-7070-27-2
^Notes on the Palamite Controversy and Related Topics by John S. Romanides, The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, Volume VI, Number 2, Winter, 1960–61. Published by the Holy Cross Greek Orthodox Theological School Press, Brookline, Massachusetts.
^"No doubt the leaders of the party held aloof from these vulgar practices of the more ignorant monks, but on the other hand they scattered broadcast perilous theological theories. Palamas taught that by asceticism one could attain a corporal, i.e. a sense view, or perception, of the Divinity. He also held that in God there was a real distinction between the Divine Essence and Its attributes, and he identified grace as one of the Divine propria making it something uncreated and infinite. These monstrous errors were denounced by the Calabrian Barlaam, by Nicephorus Gregoras, and by Acthyndinus. The conflict began in 1338 and ended only in 1368, with the solemn canonization of Palamas and the official recognition of his heresies. He was declared the 'holy doctor' and 'one of the greatest among the Fathers of the Church', and his writings were proclaimed 'the infallible guide of the Christian Faith'. Thirty years of incessant controversy and discordant councils ended with a resurrection of polytheism" (Simon Vailhé, "Greek Church" in Catholic Encyclopedia (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909)
^"Several Western scholars contend that the teaching of St. Gregory Palamas himself is compatible with Roman Catholic thought on the matter" (Michael J. Christensen, Jeffery A. Wittung (editors), Partakers of the Divine Nature (Associated University Presses 2007 ISBN0-8386-4111-3), p. 243).
Dupré, Louis (2005), "Mysticism (first edition)", in Jones, Lindsay (ed.), MacMillan Encyclopedia of Religion, MacMillan
Finch, Jeffrey D. (2007), "Neo-Palamism, Divinizing Grace, and the Breach between East and West", in Christensen, Michael J.; Wittung, Jeffery A. (eds.), Partakers of the Divine Nature: The History and Development of Deificiation in the Christian Traditions, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press
Johnson, William (1997), The Inner Eye of Love: Mysticism and Religion, HarperCollins, ISBN0-8232-1777-9
King, Richard (2002), Orientalism and Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and "The Mystic East", Routledge
Schmemann, Alexander (1995). "The idea of primacy in Orthodox ecclesiology". In Meyendorff, John (ed.). The Primacy of Peter: Essays in Ecclesiology and the Early Church. St. Vladimir's Seminary Press. ISBN978-0881411256.
Tomáš Špidlík, The Spirituality of the Christian East: A systematic handbook, Cistercian Publications, Kalamazoo, Michigan, 1986. ISBN0-87907-879-0
G.E.H. Palmer (Translator) Philip Sherrard (Translator) Kallistos Ware (Translator) The Philokalia, Volume 4: The Complete Text; Compiled by St. Nikodimos of the Holy Mountain & St. Markarios of Corinth ISBN978-0-571-19382-0
^The ROC severed full communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate in 2018, and later severed full communion with the primates of the Church of Greece, the Patriarchate of Alexandria, and the Church of Cyprus in 2020.
^ abcdefghAutocephaly or autonomy is not universally recognized.
^UOC-MP was moved to formally cut ties with the ROC as of May 27th 2022.
^ abSemi-autonomous part of the Russian Orthodox Church whose autonomy is not universally recognized.