Great Schism

Great Schism {siz' - uhm or skiz' - uhm}General Information The term Great Schism is used to refer to two major events in the history of Christianity: the division between the Eastern (Orthodox) and Western (Roman) churches, and the period (1378 - 1417) during which the Western church had first two, and later three, lines of popes. Eastern Schism The schism between the Eastern and Western churches is traditionally dated to 1054, although the precise point at which the split became a fixed and lasting reality is difficult to determine. Many causes contributed to the growing misunderstanding and alienation between the two groups. Partly these were differences of philosophical understanding, liturgical usage, language, and custom, but political rivalries and divisions were also involved. Occasions of friction, hostility, and open division on doctrinal questions as well as matters of discipline and daily practice had occurred long before 1054 - for example, the Photian schism of the 9th century.

Text Font Face . Text Size . Background Color . (for printing)

BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site

BELIEVE Religious Information Source - By Alphabet Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects

E-mail

In the West the Latin church and especially the papacy took on many activities and powers in default of other authority, but this action was often regarded as usurpation by the East, where a different relationship existed between emperor and church. The heated disputes over such matters as the ecclesiastical calendar, the use of leavened or unleavened bread, or additions to the Creed (notably the filioque clause) reached a climax in 1054, when Pope Leo IX and Patriarch Michael Cerularius excommunicated each other. Technically, only a few people were affected by this action, but the tone had been set and the direction fixed.
Later attempts to reunite the churches foundered on local feeling, and mutual hatred grew through selfish acts on both sides during some parts of the Crusades; the low point was the sacking of Constantinople in 1204 during the Fourth Crusade. The schism continues to the present, but recently serious attempts at mutual understanding have offered the hope of reconciliation.

Western Schism

The Western Schism began in the events after the death of Pope Gregory XI in March 1378. The people of Rome were determined not to allow the papacy - which had been absent at Avignon for 70 years and dominated by French influence - to leave Rome upon the election of the new pope. The result was a loud and controversial conclave with cries for a Roman or at least an Italian pope. The man chosen, Urban VI, was not a cardinal, but he had served in the curia.Soon the cardinals realized the mistake that they had made in electing Urban. He disdained the advice of others, could be ruthless if opposed or questioned, and was committed to reform through an extreme reduction of the powers of the cardinals, who for decades had been almost corulers with the popes in Avignon. The result of this clash was tragedy for the church.
Led by the French, the majority of cardinals gradually withdrew from the papal court. They met at Anagni and declared Urban's election null and void because, they alleged, their votes had been made under pressure and fear for their lives. They then elected one of their own as Pope Clement VII. For the next three decades the church was divided along national, political, and religious lines between the papal claimants - the Roman line of Urban VI, Boniface IX, Innocent VII, and Gregory XII, and the Avignon line of Clement VII and Benedict XIII - until, after various proposals and repeated failures, the cardinals from both obediences abandoned their claimants out of despair of getting any cooperation from them toward unity.
The Conciliar Epoch, which led eventually to the healing of the schism, began in 1409 when the cardinals called the Council of Pisa. The council deposed both Gregory XII and Benedict XIII and then elected a third claimant, Alexander V (to be succeeded shortly afterward by the medieval John XXIII). The Pisan claimants received the support of most of Latin Christendom, but the schism continued until the Council of Constance (1414 - 18) removed all three claimants and elected the one pope accepted by just about all - Martin V - on Nov. 11, 1417. At the Council of Basel (1431 - 49) another schism occurred with the election of "Antipope" Felix V. He abdicated, however, in 1449.
Thomas E Morrissey
Bibliography
C H Dawson, The Dividing of Christendom (1971); F Dvornik, The Photian Schism (1948); E F Jacob, Essays in the Conciliar Epoch (1963); S Runciman, The Eastern Schism (1955); J H Smith, The Great Schism (1970); R N Swanson, Universities, Academies, and the Great Schism (1979); W Ullmann, The Origins of the Great Schism (1972).

---

The Great Schism

Advanced Information

(1054)

The first permanent severing of the Christian community. Its beginnings lay in the division of the Roman Empire at the end of the third century. Thereafter, the Greek (Eastern) and Latin (Western) sections of the Roman world were administered separately. Their cultural and economic differences intensified. When the political institutions of the Latin empire collapsed in the fifth century, the Greek empire, centered in Constantinople, continued to flourish.The sustaining institution during this period was the Christian church. Its theology dominated all forms of though in both the united East and the disintegrating West. Important issues, even worldly ones, were transposed into theological questions.
Two fundamental differences between the Latin Catholic and Greek Orthodox traditions developed during the early Middle Ages. The first was the Petrine Doctrine, absolute in the West, resisted in the East. And the second was a Western addition to the Nicene Creed which provoked the filioque controversy. Other divisive issues such as the celibacy of the priesthood, use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist, episcopal control over the sacrament of confirmation, and priestly beards and monkish tonsures were the source of conflict but not schism.
Of all the institutions that the medieval Christian empire shared, the political was the first to collapse. In the West during the fifth century imperial authority fell before invading barbarian kings. Increasingly the Roman patriarch, the pope, filled the power vacuum left by retreating politicians. The lines between secular and ecclestical authority were hopelessly blurred. On the other hand, in Constantinople, where imperial power was still strong, Christian emperors continued to preside over an integrated Christian society. As heirs of Constantine, Byzantine emperors dominated the administration of church and state in the style still known as caesaropapism.
Theology in the East was speculative, with important decisions submitted to a collegial - concilliar system in which all the patriarchs, the bishops of Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Rome, played an important role. It was fully acknowledged that the bishop of Rome had pride of place and certain rights of review over the other four. As early as the pontificate of Leo I (440 - 61), however, Roman patriarchs demanded more power. Matters were made more difficult by the rise of Islam and new barbarian attacks in the seventh and eighth centuries. The West became even more isolated, and when contacts between Rome and Constantinople were resumed the gulf between East and West had widened.
The filioque controversy seems to have originated in sixth century Visigothic Spain where the Arian heresy was endemic. The Arians claimed that the first and second persons of the Trinity were not coeternal and equal. In an effort to enforce traditional theology, Spanish churchmen added a phrase to the Nicene Creed, "ex Patre Filioque," which amended the old form to state that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Son as well as from the Father. However, it had been agreed in the fourth century that no change in the wording of the creed, except by conciliar consent, was possible. To the theologically sophisticated East, the filioque phrase seemed to challenge not only the universal creed, but also the official doctrine of the Trinity. When the issue was raised during the reign of Charlemagne (768 - 814), the papacy seemed to agree. Pope Leo III, while approving the spirit of the filioque, warned against any alteration in the wording of the creed.
It was the fusion of the filioque controversy with the rise of papal power that created the great crisis of 1054. The "reform" papacy of the eleventh century established itself on the right of the pope, as apostolic heir of Peter, to absolute power over all Christian people and institutions. Such claims had been rejected by the early church councils. To Eastern patriarchs Christ's charge to Peter in Matt. 16:18 - 19 was shared by all the apostles and their spiritual heirs, the bishops. In 1054 Pope Leo IX (1048 - 54) sent a delegation headed by Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida to discuss the problems between the papacy and Constantinople. Disaster followed. The Patriarch of Constantinople. Michael Cerularius, rejected both papal claims and the filioque. The Western legates accused Constantinople of having altered the Nicene Creed. In the end, Cardinal Humbert deposited a Bull of Excommunication against Michael Cerularius on the altar of the Hagia Sophia, and the Great Schism was official.
Thereafter, efforts were made at reunion. As the Muslim Turks advanced on the Byzantine Empire in the high Middle Ages, Eastern Christians were in desperate need of relief from their Western brethren. However, all such hopes ceased when, in 1204, an army of crusading knights from the West sacked Constantinople. Eastern Christians never recovered from this outrage. In recent years effort to reconcile the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches have failed. In 1965, Pope Paul VI lifted the ban of excommunication against Michael Cerularius. However, the problem of papal rule has been rendered more difficult by nineteenth century Roman declarations of papal infallibility. The wording of the creed has not been settled.
C T Marshall
(Elwell Evangelical Dictionary)
Bibliography
F Dvornik, Byzantium and the Roman Primacy; J Pelikan, The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600 - 1700); S Runciman, The Eastern Schism; P Sherrad, The Greek East and the Latin West; T Ware, The Orthodox Church.

---

The "Eastern Church"

Advanced Information - Catholic Perspective(Editor's Note: The linked article from the Catholic Encyclopedia does not meet the usual standards that BELIEVE sets for included articles. The tone of the article is substantially biased toward the Catholic Church and against the Orthodox Church and all other Churches, which would normally eliminate it from consideration. However, the Great Schism was and is such a large event in the history of Christendom, that we felt the need to present both the Catholic and Orthodox perspectives. Our hope is to enable a reader to be able to read and ponder both sides of this important issue, even though both sides' presentations are very biased.) Eastern Church

---

The Great Schism of the Ecumenical Church

Advanced Information - Orthodox Perspective(Editor's Note: The following article does not meet the usual standards that BELIEVE sets for included articles. The tone of the article is substantially biased toward the Orthodox Church and against the Catholic Church, which would normally eliminate it from consideration. However, the Great Schism was and is such a large event in the history of Christendom, that we felt the need to present the Orthodox perspective. As we understand it, any actual scholarly Orthodox works on this subject have never been yet translated into English. Our hope is to enable a reader to be able to read and ponder both sides of this important issue, which will hopefully soon be resolved by the two Churches.)

Unity of the Churches

The movement toward the unity of the Christian Churches today demands a knowledge of the beliefs of others as well as of one's own beliefs, in order to provide a climate for unity through a better understanding of each other's faith. A blind acceptance of the teachings and beliefs of any Church with which unity is sought, or an indifference toward one's own beliefs and teaching will not be a solid basis for unity among the Christian Churches.
A Christian interested in the unity of the Churches should oppose both bigotry and indifference. He ought to study his own faith and the beliefs of others in the past and in the present with humbleness and sympathy; to invoke the grace of God to guide his understanding of both views; to distinguish between divine truths for salvation and the customs and practices of his Church and of the various other Churches.
If a unity is sought between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church, it is indispensable that the reasons and causes for separation between these Churches be carefully studied in the light of the circumstances and personalities of the time when the separation took place.
When the Church was One and Undivided, proclaiming the same beliefs and having the same type of administration, the Eastern branch protested against the Western because of the latter's innovations, which were foreign to the beliefs and practices set forth by the Seven Ecumenical Synods of the first eight centuries. The claim of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, which later resulted in the proclaiming of his infallibility, is considered the main cause of separation of the Western branch from the Eastern.
A concise study of the events and incidents of this separation - called the Great Schism - is presented in the following pages in order to furnish facts necessary for a better understanding and eventual answer for the unity of these Churches in the future. Innovations formulated by the Roman Catholic Church after the Schism are innumerated.

The Real Motives of the Great Schism

The Early Period of the Church

Although the Bishops of the undivided Church were (and are) equal to each other in the administration of the liturgical rites and the teaching, they began to differ in rank according to the valuation of the places where their Sees were located. Rome, Alexandria and Antioch were prominent cities, Metropolis, in those days. Their Bishops were Metropolitans, and the Bishop of Rome was given the honorary precedence only because Rome was then the political capital of the world. Later, the Bishops of the capitals of all political Provinces were called Archbishops. When the Emperor moved his Seat from Rome to Constantinople, the Archbishop of latter was given equal reverence with that of Rome "because Constantinople was the 'King's city' "; later in 587, the honorary title of "Ecumenical" was bestowed on him, too. By 451 the Bishops of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem were called Patriarchs, of whom only two remained free after the inroads of the Moslems (7th century): that of Rome in the West, and Constantinople in the East, both equal in rank and reverence. Later, the attempted abolishment of the equal rank status of both Seats was the main cause of the Great Separation.

The Claims Of The Bishops Of Rome

The Bishop of Rome, even today in the 20th century, insists that he has a primacy of jurisdiction over all Churches, including the Patriarchs of the East. He claims they should be subject to him since "he is not only Bishop of Rome and the Patriarch of the West but also the Vicar of Christ on Earth, the successor of St. Peter, and the Supreme Pontiff". Pope Pius XII in 1955 called upon the "Uniat" Church to use its utmost to bring the Orthodox Churches to the "fold". The Eastern Orthodox is told that it would not be necessary to change any of the teachings or customs of the Orthodox Church but to submit himself under the Pope's jurisdiction; that is, to lose every right of freedom and independence. In other words, unconditional surrender under the Pope's yoke is asked. But the principles of the democratic government of the Eastern Orthodox Church is its very foundation. The "Conscience of the Church" is its supreme authority and the infallible guidance to proclaim the truth of Salvation, as was the case for centuries for the Western Church, too. The question as to the supremacy of the Pope was the main cause of the separation of the Eastern and Western Churches. Is it a true claim? How and when did the Popes start to claim such authority?

The Development Of The Pope's Claims To Supremacy

The roots of the claim of supremacy of the Bishop of Rome over the political and ecclesiastical leaders are to be found in the traditions of pagan Rome here the Emperor was the supreme Pontiff.
Millions of early Christians were persecuted and slaughtered because they refused to worship the Emperor as God. Their precious sacrifice did not destroy the super-throne; it was used merely to replace the pagan Emperor with the Christian Pope.

Thus, with that background, some of the bishops of Rome invented and manufactured fictitious theories of the pope's "divine right" to govern the affairs of State as well as of the Church. The claims thereby divided the Church, which by nature and principle was meant to be One; the bishops waged wars, created inquisitions, forced on the West the Great Protest, and finally, developed theories as to infallibility, and all of these in the name of God!
These fictitious theories, which were destined to be accepted as true for some centuries, though later recognized distinctly as the most cleverly manufactured falsehoods are three: The Pseudo-Clementines, the Pseudo-Isidorian Decrees, and the Pseudo-Constantine Donation.

The Pseudo-Clementine Writings

The Attempt To Elevate Peter And The Seat Of Rome To Supremacy.

The Pseudo-Clementine writings are false "Homilies" (discourses) falsely attributed to the Bishop of Rome Clement (93-101), which attempted to restate the life of Apostle Peter. The purpose was one: the elevation of Peter over the other Apostles, especially Apostle Paul, and the elevation of the Seat of Rome over any other Bishop's Seat "Peter", it was claimed, "who was the most able of all (the others)' was called to illuminate the West, the darkest place of the Universe."
The "Homilies" were written to fit the misleading interpretation of Matthew 16:18,19, that "You art Peter, and on this rock I will build my church ... and I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven ". It is misleading because the word "rock" does not refer to Peter, but to the faith that "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God" (v. 16). There is not one sign of the primacy of Peter over the other Apostles mentioned in the Bible, and if a primacy was intended, a decision of such importance and magnitude certainly would have been mentioned in the Bible in unambiguous language. In many cases the opposite is true; Paul wrote to Galatians, "I withstood him, (Peter) to the face, because he was to be blamed" (2:11); besides, it is well known that Peter thrice denied Christ. Peter did not found the Church of Rome; he actually remained in Antioch for many years before reaching Rome. To say that as Christ reigns in Heaven, Peter and his successors, the popes, govern the Earth, is a statement alien to the spirit of the Gospel and the understanding of the early Church. Christ was and is the cornerstone and the Head of the Church, consisting of all members of His Body. (cf. Col.1:24).

The Pseudo-Isidorian Decrees And The Pseudo-Constantian Donation

The Attempt To Legitimatize the Papacy.

These Decrees are a collection, arranged in the 9th century, consisting of canons of synods as well as the Pope's false decrees, which were added later. For these decrees it is said that "No other illegitimacy in the history of the world was made with such cleverness, and no other forgery has such results", as a great historian wrote. The illegitimacy lies in the skilled counterfeiting of canonical sources in such a way that the supremacy of the Pope was its concrete results. The Priesthood, they concluded, is above political authority; and the head of the Priesthood is the Pope; the Pope then is the "Head of the Universe" (caput totius orbis). This "conclusion" was supported by another clever forgery that Constantine the Great left to the Pope the political power of his position in Rome as a Donation to him!
These highly skilled pieces of forgery only awaited a master to enforce them - Pope Nicholas I. Pope Nicholas I (858-867), a strong-willed personality, called them "ancient monuments" and imposed them upon the bishops and political authorities of the West. It was said of him that "Nicholas made himself Emperor of all the world." After the period of ill fame of the popes and clergy these forgeries became the official rules for the new reform and moral uprightness of the clergy. Thus the Pseudo-Isidorian decrees had prevailed and established the "primacy" of the Pope. Historians as well as Catholic scholars recognize that these "Decrees" have been proven as forgeries; but nevertheless they were used as the foundation for the supremacy of the Pope. How long will the popes themselves continue to believe in the strength of their house without a solid foundation? The popes continue attempting to conquer all churches and especially the Eastern Orthodox Church by using a new instrument: the Uniat Church. "Return back to the fold" is a plea which is heard time and again. Possibly it results from a religious inferiority complex as far as the trust and historical facts are concerned. The Eastern Church is "the pillar and bulwark of the truth " which has been preserved by it "everywhere, anytime" against the undue claims or encroachments by the See of the West. The "fold" is where the "truth" is taught; where the One only Shepherd is recognized as its Head, Jesus Christ. To that "fold" the Western Church is called to join by abolishing the "innovations" and the pretext of supremacy of the Pope at the expense of the "fold".

Actual Events that led to the Schism

Synopsis Of The Events Of The Great Schism

Four separations between the Eastern and Western parts of the Undivided Church took place without an official statement of schism, and they lasted from 15 to 50 years until the churches resumed their union again. The great and last schism resulted from a chain of events between the Western and Eastern parts of the Church which lasted for approximately two hundred years (863-1054). At the beginning and the end there were some acts of excommunications on both sides. During this period of silence, indifference and hatred dominated both sides, ruining the last fortress of the Union.

The Election Of Patriarch Of Constantinople Photius

Photius, a prominent layman, the chief Secretary of State, whose "virtue, wisdom and competence were universally acknowledged", was appointed and elected (875) as Patriarch of Constantinople straight from the rank of layman, replacing Patriarch Ignatius. Pope Nicholas, seeing a favorable opportunity for interfering in Eastern affairs, appointed himself as judge over two conflicting parties by his own authority and rejected the election of Photius. He asserted on the one hand that Photius had been made Patriarch without his approval, an unprecedented claim, and on the other hand that he had been raised within a single week from a mere layman, to the rank of Archbishop. Of course, Pope Nicholas had no right to interfere in such an affair; therefore, the election was valid, as was the case with Ambrose, a bishop of Milan, and many other laymen who had been raised to high rank in the Church.

Synod Repudiates Pope's Claim

Four years later, in 861, at a Synod in Constantinople both parties, Photians and Ignatians, decided in favor of Photius in the presence of the Pope's delegates. Pope Nicholas, who was furious because the Eastern Church did not submit slavishly to his arbitrary demands, convened a Synod of his own in Rome in 863 and "excommunicated" Photius, the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Church ignored this additional provocation.

Photius' Encyclical Against The Pope's Innovations

Pope Nicholas, by the same arbitrary authority, attempted to detach the young Church of Bulgaria, which was founded by the Church of Constantinople and by Photius himself, from its allegiance to its Mother Church. Because of this anti-canonical activity of Pope Nicholas, Photius sent out in 867 his famous encyclical to the Patriarchs of the East accusing the Pope:

1. of inserting into the Creed the word "filoque", meaning that the Holy Spirit proceeds not only from the Father but "and from the Son" as well;
2. for intervening in the newly founded Church of Bulgaria by repeating the sacrament of Chrismation, to the Bulgarian Christians on the pretext that they had previously been baptized by married priests from Constantinople;
3. for dominating the churches of the West; and
4. for interfering in disputes outside his own jurisdiction.

Photius Dethroned And Later Vindicated

Pope Adrian II, possessed by the same pride and ambition as his predecessor, exploited a psychological moment in Eastern affairs to achieve what Pope Nicholas could not. Emperor Basil, who was refused Holy Communion by Photius because he murdered his foster father, Emperor Michael, in 867 deposed Photius from his throne and brought back Ignatius. Pope Adrian II took advantage of this situation and demanded from Basil the condemnation of Photius, the common enemy. Emperor Basil convened a synod in 869, and by coersion brought the bishops to condemn Photius. Adrian's delegates and Basil forcibly and falsely obtained the acknowledgment that the Pope is the "supreme and absolute head of all the Churches, superior even to ecumenical synods". This so-called eighth ecumenical synod (by the Western Church) has never been recognized by the Eastern Church, but after 10 years it was unanimously denounced by a great Synod in Constantinople, in 879, by Ignatians as well as Photians. This synod acknowledged the full justification of Photius and his manly stand against the Roman despotism. Photius is considered the unmovable rock against which all the heavy waves of slavery and domination have been broken. The Church thanks the Lord, its Head, for the inspiration of this great man by "whom the Eastern Church has managed to preserve intact both faith and freedom".

Period Of Cold Silence (879-1054)

Nevertheless, no official schism was pronounced by either Church until 1054. During this period of approximately two hundred years a chill of silence prevailed. Six generations were not sufficient to expel this evil element from the Church. The arbitrariness of human administration dominated fellowship and love, which are considered the substance and fruit of Christ's divine work and message.

The Final Break (1054)

The seal of separation which was placed on paper in 1054, dividing the Church into East and West, was brought to a head by an innocent act by the Patriarch Michael Cerularius. He wrote a letter to Bishop John of Trania in Italy enumerating the innovations which had been introduced by the Roman Church, and he begged him to give this letter a wide hearing in order that the truth might prevail. This act apparently witnesses the fact that the Patriarch did not accept any sort of schism yet. Pope Leo IX sent a sharp reply, severely rebuking the author of the letter.
The Emperor of Constantinople, Constantine Monomathus, facing a threat of his political interest in Italy, had need of the Pope's help, and he sent a conciliatory reply asking him to send delegates to restore friendly relations. The Pope sent Cardinal Humbert with a different mission, which he fully executed. Humbert did not meet the Emperor or the Patriarch, but he laid on the altar of the Church of Saint Sophia in Constantinople a bull of excommunication against the Eastern Church, attempting to stigmatize it as "the repository of all the heresies of the past", and then hastily disappeared. The Patriarch in turn drew up a sentence of excommunication against the Western Church, signed jointly by the other Patriarchs. And thus the black seal kept closed the gates of the bridges between East and West.

The Main Cause Of Separation

The ambition of the Popes (as we respectfully call the Bishops of Rome) was to subordinate the Eastern Church under their supremacy. The See of Rome was ancient and apostolic. Its bishops could, without any more interference from the Emperor, exercise a kind of political authority, too. They began very early to appear as a court of appeal, in the West, to which all problems should be submitted for solution. They found a pretext for their intrusion in the domestic quarrels at Constantinople during the 9th century in order to invade and dominate the entire Eastern Church.
A Catholic scholar states that:

"... the Papacy, from and after the ninth century, attempted to impose, in the name of God, upon the universal Church a yoke unknown to the first eight centuries".

The same attempt is in process today with the letter issued (1955) by Pope Pius XII, urging the Uniates to convert the Orthodox people and bring them under the Pope's rule.

Reunion Sought

The Crusades and Forced "Reunion"

Later, the Crusaders from the West forced the Greek Patriarchs of Antioch and Jerusalem to abandon their Sees and for sixty years imposed their cruel government on Constantinople (1204-1261), pillaging its resources and causing its eventual downfall. An effort at "reunion" was really an attempt to enslave the Eastern Church at the Pseudo-Synod of Ferrara-Florence (1438) where the representatives of the Eastern Church, by force, signed a statement of reunion. Although it was proclaimed on July 6, 1439, it was never approved by the Church as a whole and was later denounced by a synod in Constantinople in 1451. Orthodoxy has suffered more from the Christian West than from the Moslem East. The downfall of Constantinople in 1453 put a tragic end to any effort at reunion.

The Possibility Of Reunion And The Honorary Position Of The Pope

For approximately one thousand years the Eastern and Western Churches were united, without at least any open attempt of one to subordinate the other. The Eastern Church never has raised such a demand. It has always respected the Holy See of Rome and its Bishop, who was considered to be "the first among equals". He abolished this brotherly relation with the other leaders of the Church and separated himself and the Western Church from the Eastern. The Eastern Orthodox Church did not accept the claim of the Pope and his attempt at supremacy because for hundreds of years the undivided Church never considered such a claim. There is hope and a possibility of reunion. It depends upon the Leaders rather than the people of both Churches and especially upon the Holy Father of Rome. The Separation took place in 1054 not because of a false dogma as was the case with heretics. Both Sees and Churches exist up till today. That which has made the situation more difficult after the separation is that besides the stronger ambition of the Popes for their supremacy, the Western Church has created a new type of government and many "innovations" and dogmas, some of which can be considered as local customs. Both Churches should accept the principles of affiliation and the Truths of faith which the one undivided Church knew in the first thousand years of our Lord.

---

The Innovations

Although the beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church are closer to the beliefs of the Orthodox Church than are those of any other churches, it is necessary to list a few of the innovations added by the Roman Church after the separation of the Western from the Eastern Church. Also, it is necessary to mention that the attitude of the Western section of the One Church, even before the Schism, was not free from arbitrariness. The Western branch tended to centralize administrative power, a characteristic inherited from the early Roman political tendencies toward a totalitarian government. Following is the list of innovations.

Primacy

The supreme episcopal jurisdiction of the Pope, who is called the Vicar of Christ (a title of the Roman pontiff dating from the 8th century) expresses his claim to universal jurisdiction and implies that the other bishops are not equal to him, but subordinate to him as his representatives - a claim that is foreign to the ancient Church.

Infallibility

In 1870 the Roman Catholic Church, at the Vatican Council, declared that infallibility (the inability to err in teaching the revealed truth) was attached to the definition of the Pope in matters of faith and morals, apart from the consent of the Church. The Vatican Council declared:

"Jesus Christ has three existences. His personal existence, which Arius denied; His mystical existence in the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, which Calvin denied; and His other existence, which completes the first two and through which He lives constantly, namely His authority in the person of His Vicar on Earth. The Council, maintaining this third existence, assures the world that it possesses Jesus Christ."

Herein, the Synods were abolished.

The Procession of the Holy Spirit

The insertion of the phrase filoque, meaning "and the son", in the eighth article of the Nicene Creed, to read that the Holy Spirit proceeds not only from the Father but also from the Son as well, perverts the theological teaching of the Gospel and the Undivided Church (John 15,26; Acts 2,33).

Purgatory and indulgences

Purgatory is an intermediate state where souls are made clean for paradise by expiatory suffering, according to the Roman Church. It is a place or state for penitent souls departing this life cleansed from venial sins and temporal punishment due to remitted mortal sins. In the Roman Church, indulgences are a remission by those authorized of the temporary punishment still due to sin after sacramental absolution either in this world or in purgatory.

The Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary

In 1854 a council of the Vatican pronounced the new teaching that the Virgin Mary was born without original sin, a statement not found either in the Holy Scriptures or in Sacrad Tradition. (The Undivided Church taught and teaches the virgin birth of Jesus Christ only) The Orthodox Church honors highly the Virgin Mary as the Theotokos, the unique personality chosen by God to serve the highest mission toward the salvation of mankind in the Incarnation of Jesus Christ.

Assumption of the Virgin Mary

The assumption (bodily ascension) of the Virgin Mary was pronounced as a dogma in 1952 by the Pope of the Rome Church. This belief is not found in the Scriptures nor is it found in the Sacred Tradition.
(EDITOR'S NOTE: that date might actually be 1950.)

Baptism

Baptism, which originally was an immersion of the body of the faithful in the water, was replaced during the 14th century in the Roman Church by sprinkling.

Invocation

The invocation, or epiklesis, which is a prayer offered at the time of the change of the Holy Gifts (bread and wine), is omitted by the Roman Church, which uses only the scriptural words, "Take, eat ..." and "Drink ye all of it ..."

Unleavened Bread

Unleavened bread is used by the Roman Church instead of leavened bread, which was the tradition of the Undivided Church.

Holy Communion

Holy Communion in the Roman Church is given to the layman only from the sanctified bread and not from the sanctified wine, which now is restricted to the clergy.

Holy Unction

Holy Unction is offered as last rites to the sick, an innovation of the eleventh century.

Divorce

Divorce is not granted to the faithful in the Roman Church, which the Undivided Church issued.

Clergy's Marital Status

Marriage of the clergy is prohibited, a restriction imposed in the later centuries against the decision of the First Ecumenical Synod (325 A.D.).

---

HOPE FOR "UNITY OF FAITH"

An historic event of great magnitude took place on Jan. 5, 1964, when Patriarch Athenagoras I and Pope Paul VI met in Jerusalem. Their "embrace of peace" and declaration of reconciliation was the first official act by the two churches since the Schism in 1054. Then in 1965 both churches lifted the anathemas and excommunications placed against one another in 1054. These great events however have not changed the actual status of each church, for the Schism still remains. In addition, the unprecedented journeys of the Patriarch and the Pope to one another's See were the result of the lifting of historical obstacles. This has led to dialogue between the two churches for the first time in 900 years. These historical events are hopeful signs to resolving the problems of the Great Schism.

Hope For Unity Of The Christian Churches

Pure Faith is a living faith for all the members of the Mystical Body of Christ. It is not the Faith of the technical theologian nor of the narrow minded faithful. The Christian Faith does not require knowledge of geometry as was the case with Plato's philosophy. The theologian who is supposed to be more versed in the Divine Revelation is not a teacher of his original theories but rather an instructor of Truths, which have already been revealed and can be accepted by all people on faith.

The Christian faith is not a theory or erudition but a living element working in every sincere Christian. The technical theological controversies are only for the "pleasure of knowledge" of a very few people, but not for the members of the Mystical Body of Christ. They are rather the personal presuppositions of learned men, who have become entangled in the net they have woven, from which they Cannot set themselves free. Some technical theologians and others with a talented and dynamic personality, on occasions of strong disagreement or in an assumption of a new movement, have separated themselves or led their followers out of the Mystical Body of Christ, the Undivided and Ecumenical Church.
Their followers have never understood the, deep theological arguments involved; they never have followed such a leader with a sound conviction of keeping the venerable Faith intact. They have followed him because of human motives and superficial justifications. Neither the leaders nor the followers have stood united in the very Mystical Body of Christ to fight, if necessary, for the restoration of any faulty direction or corruption of the other fellow members of the one Body. Instead they left and are disunited, constituting what they believe to be a "new" faith. But from such new groups others have left also for a more "pure" faith, and so on.

All the churches of Christ today first must return to the Truths of the Undivided Church, the Ecumenical Church, with humbleness and repentance to restore the pure faith - "the unity of faith"; without a rigid conformity as far as customs and rites are concerned.

The first five centuries of the Christian era was the period during which the foundation of the Church was established by the blood of its martyrs and the teaching and works of its great Fathers. By the end of the 10th century the separation of the One Church took place because of the human weakness of the Church leaders in the administration and customs rather than from its disagreement over the redemptive Truths of the Church. By the end of the 15th century the movement began against the discrepancies of the current leaders of the Western Church, but it went far beyond the anticipations of its leaders. Can we hope that at least by the close of the 20th century we will complete the Hegelian trilogy of synthesis, i.e. the unity of all churches? For the Church of Christ was meant to be one:

"There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all and in all" (Eph. 4:5-6).

We pray and we hope.
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
(Editor's Note: Other branches of the Orthodox Church hold differing views on many of these issues. In some cases, they even consider the date of the Great Schism to not be 1054 AD but 1204 AD when the Catholic Crusades sacked Constantinople.)

---

The individual articles presented here were generally first published in the early 1980s. This subject presentation was first placed on the Internet in May 1997.This page - - Great Schism - - is at http://mb-soft.com/believe/txc/gschism.htm 
This subject presentation was last updated on - - 03/15/2013 15:30:37

This Western only gathering was suspended and never formally closed nor promulgated and therefore is of no effect canonically



Decrees of the First Vatican Council

Decrees of the First Vatican Council Foreward The translation found here is that which appears in Decrees of the Ecumencal Councils ed. Norman Tanner. S.J. Apart from the footnotes any text in square brackets "[ ]" is my addition. The choice of terms to put in bold or italic print, the arangement of the text into paragraphs in "structured english" format, as well as the numbering of the paragraphs is also my own and constitutes my "invisible" interpretation/commentary. The numbering of the canons is however found in Tanner's text. Contents INTRODUCTION SESSION 1 : 8 December 1869 - Opening of the Council SESSION 2 : 6 January 1870 - Profession of Faith SESSION 3 : 24 April 1870 - Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith Chapter 1 On God the creator of all things Chapter 2 On revelation Chapter 3 On faith Chapter 4. On faith and reason CANONS 1. On God the creator of all things 2. On revelation 3. On faith 4. On faith and reason SESSION 4 : 18 July 1870 - First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ Chapter 1 On the institution of the apostolic primacy in blessed Peter Chapter 2. On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs Chapter 3. On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman pontffi Chapter 4. On the infallible teaching authority of the Roman pontiff The definition of Papal Infallibility INTRODUCTION This council was summoned by Pope Pius IX by the bull Aeterni Patris of 29 June 1868. The first session was held in St Peter's basilica on 8 December 1869 in the presence and under the presidency of the pope.The purpose of the council was, besides the condemnation of contemporary errors, to define the catholic doctrine concerning the church of Christ. In fact, in the three following sessions, there was discussion and approval of only two constitutions: Dogmatic Constitution On The Catholic Faith and First Dogmatic Constitution on the church of Christ, the latter dealing with the primacy and infallibility of the bishop of Rome. The discussion and approval of the latter constitution gave rise, particularly in Germany, to bitter and most serious controversies which led to the withdrawal from the church of those known as "Old Catholics". The outbreak of the Franco-Prussian war led to the interruption of the council. It was in fact never resumed, nor was it ever officially closed. As in other councils at which the pope was present and presided, the decrees were in the form of bulls, at the end of which was the clear declaration: "with the approval of the sacred council". Very large numbers attended this council, including, for the first time, bishops from outside Europe and its neighbouring lands. Bishops from the eastern Orthodox churches were also invited, but did not come. The decrees of the council were published in various simultaneous editions. Later they were included in volume 7 of Collectio Lacensis ( 1892) and in volumes 49-53 of Mansi's collection (1923-1927). The collection which we use is that entitled Acta et decreta sacrosancti oecumenici concilii Vaticani in quatuor prionbus sessionibus, Rome 1872. Comparison with other editions reveals no discrepancies, indeed absolute agreement. Return to Table of Contents SESSION 1 : 8 December 1869 Decree of opening of the council Pius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an everlasting record. Most reverend fathers, is it your pleasure that, to the praise and glory of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father, Son and holy Spirit, for the increase and exaltation of the catholic faith and religion, for the uprooting of current errors, for the reformation of the clergy and the christian people, and for the common peace and concord of all, the holy ecumenical Vatican council should be opened, and be declared to have been opened?[They replied: Yes] Pius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an everlasting record. Most reverend fathers, is it your pleasure that the next session of the holy ecumenical Vatican council should be held on the feast of the Epiphany of the Lord, that is 6 January 1870? [They replied: Yes] Return to Table of Contents SESSION 2 : 6 January 1870 Profession of faith I, Pius, bishop of the catholic church, with firm faith believe and profess each and every article contained in the profession of faith which the holy Roman church uses, namely: I believe in one God the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things seen and unseen. And in one Lord Jesus Christ the only-begotten Son of God. Born of the Father before all ages. God from God, light from light, true God from true God. Begotten not made, of one substance with the Father: through whom all things were made. Who for us humans and for our salvation came down from heaven. He was incarnate by the holy Spirit of the virgin Mary: and became man. He was crucified also for us, he suffered under Pontius Pilate and was buried. The third day he rose again according to the scriptures. He ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father. He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, and of his kingdom there shall be no end. And in the holy Spirit, the lord and the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. Who together with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified: who spoke through the prophets. And one holy, catholic and apostolic church. I confess one baptism for the remission of Sins. And I look for the resurrection of the dead. And the life of the world to come Amen. Apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and all other observances and constitutions of that same church I most firmly accept and embrace. Likewise I accept sacred scripture according to that sense which holy mother church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy scriptures; nor will I ever receive and interpret them except according to the unanimous consent of the fathers. I profess also that there are seven sacraments of the new law, truly and properly so called, instituted by our lord Jesus Christ and necessary for salvation, though each person need not receive them all. They are: baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance, last anointing, order and matrimony; and they confer grace. Of these baptism, confirmation and order may not be repeated without sacrilege. I likewise receive and accept the rites of the catholic church which have been received and approved in the solemn administration of all the aforesaid sacraments. I embrace and accept the whole and every part of what was defined and declared by the holy council of Trent concerning original sin and justification. Likewise I profess that in the mass there is offered to God a true, proper and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead; and that in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly, really and substantially the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our lord Jesus Christ; and that there takes place the conversion of the whole substance of the bread into his body, and of the whole substance of the wine into his blood, and this conversion the catholic church calls transubstantiation. I confess that under either species alone the whole and complete Christ and the true sacrament are received. I firmly hold that purgatory exists, and that the souls detained there are helped by the suffrages of the faithful. Likewise, that the saints reigning with Christ are to be honoured and prayed to, and that they offer prayers to God on our behalf, and that their relics should be venerated. I resolutely assert that images of Christ and the ever virgin mother of God, and likewise those of the other saints, are to be kept and retained, and that due honour and reverence is to be shown them. I affirm that the power of indulgences was left by Christ in the church, and that their use is eminently beneficial to the christian people. I acknowledge the holy, catholic, apostolic and Roman church, the mother and mistress of all the churches [1] . Likewise all other things which have been transmitted, defined and declared by the sacred canons and the ecumenical councils, especially the sacred Trent, I accept unhesitatingly and profess; in the same way whatever is to the contrary, and whatever heresies have been condemned, rejected and anathematised by the church, I too condemn, reject and anathematise. This true catholic faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold, is what I shall steadfastly maintain and confess, by the help of God, in all its completeness and purity until my dying breath, and I shall do my best to ensure [2] that all others do the same. This is what I, the same Pius, promise, vow and swear. So help me God and these holy gospels of God. Return to Table of Contents SESSION 3 : 24 April 1870 Dogmatic constitution on the catholic faith Pius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an everlasting record. The Son of God, redeemer of the human race, our lord Jesus Christ, promised, when about to return to his heavenly Father, that he would be with this church militant upon earth all days even to the end of the world [3] . Hence never at any time has he ceased to stand by his beloved bride, assisting her when she teaches, blessing her in her labours and bringing her help when she is in danger. Now this redemptive providence appears very clearly in unnumbered benefits, but most especially is it manifested in the advantages which have been secured for the christian world by ecumenical councils, among which the council of Trent requires special mention, celebrated though it was in evil days. Thence came a closer definition and more fruitful exposition of the holy dogmas of religion and the condemnation and repression of errors; thence too, the restoration and vigorous strengthening of ecclesiastical discipline, the advancement of the clergy in zeal for learning and piety, the founding of colleges for the training of the young for the service of religion; and finally the renewal of the moral life of the christian people by a more accurate instruction of the faithful, and a more frequent reception of the sacraments. What is more, thence also came a closer union of the members with the visible head, and an increased vigour in the whole mystical body of Christ. Thence came the multiplication of religious orders and other organisations of christian piety; thence too that determined and constant ardour for the spreading of Christ's kingdom abroad in the world, even at the cost of shedding one's blood. While we recall with grateful hearts, as is only fitting, these and other outstanding gains, which the divine mercy has bestowed on the church especially by means of the last ecumenical synod, we cannot subdue the bitter grief that we feel at most serious evils, which have largely arisen either because the authority of the sacred synod was held in contempt by all too many, or because its wise decrees were neglected. Everybody knows that those heresies, condemned by the fathers of Trent, which rejected the divine magisterium of the church and allowed religious questions to be a matter for the judgment of each individual, have gradually collapsed into a multiplicity of sects, either at variance or in agreement with one another; and by this means a good many people have had all faith in Christ destroyed. Indeed even the holy Bible itself, which they at one time claimed to be the sole source and judge of the christian faith, is no longer held to be divine, but they begin to assimilate it to the inventions of myth. Thereupon there came into being and spread far and wide throughout the world that doctrine of rationalism or naturalism, - utterly opposed to the christian religion, since this is of supernatural origin, - which spares no effort to bring it about that Christ, who alone is our lord and saviour, is shut out from the minds of people and the moral life of nations. Thus they would establish what they call the rule of simple reason or nature. The abandonment and rejection of the christian religion, and the denial of God and his Christ, has plunged the minds of many into the abyss of pantheism, materialism and atheism, and the consequence is that they strive to destroy rational nature itself, to deny any criterion of what is right and just, and to overthrow the very foundations of human society. With this impiety spreading in every direction, it has come about, alas, that many even among the children of the catholic church have strayed from the path of genuine piety, and as the truth was gradually diluted in them, their catholic sensibility was weakened. Led away by diverse and strange teachings [4] and confusing nature and grace, human knowledge and divine faith, they are found to distort the genuine sense of the dogmas which holy mother church holds and teaches, and to endanger the integrity and genuineness of the faith. At the sight of all this, how can the inmost being of the church not suffer anguish? For just as God wills all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth [5] , just as Christ came to save what was lost [6] and to gather into one the children of God who were scattered abroad [7] , so the church, appointed by God to be mother and mistress of nations, recognises her obligations to all and is always ready and anxious to raise the fallen, to steady those who stumble, to embrace those who return, and to strengthen the good and urge them on to what is better. Thus she can never cease from witnessing to the truth of God which heals all [8 ] and from declaring it, for she knows that these words were directed to her: My spirit which is upon you, and my words which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your mouth from this time forth and for evermore [9] . And so we, following in the footsteps of our predecessors, in accordance with our supreme apostolic office, have never left off teaching and defending catholic truth and condemning erroneous doctrines. But now it is our purpose to profess and declare from this chair of Peter before all eyes the saving teaching of Christ, and, by the power given us by God, to reject and condemn the contrary errors. This we shall do with the bishops of the whole world as our co-assessors and fellow-judges, gathered here as they are in the holy Spirit by our authority in this ecumenical council, and relying on the word of God in scripture and tradition as we have received it, religiously preserved and authentically expounded by the catholic church Return to Table of Contents Chapter 1 On God the creator of all things The holy, catholic, apostolic and Roman church believes and acknowledges that there is one true and living God, creator and lord of heaven and earth, almighty, eternal, immeasurable, incomprehensible, infinite in will, understanding and every perfection. Since he is one, singular, completely simple and unchangeable spiritual substance, he must be declared to be in reality and in essence, distinct from the world, supremely happy in himself and from himself, and inexpressibly loftier than anything besides himself which either exists or can be imagined. This one true God, by his goodness and almighty power, not with the intention of increasing his happiness, nor indeed of obtaining happiness, but in order to manifest his perfection by the good things which he bestows on what he creates, by an absolutely free plan, together from the beginning of time brought into being from nothing the twofold created order, that is the spiritual and the bodily, the angelic and the earthly, and thereafter the human which is, in a way, common to both since it is composed of spirit and body [10]. Everything that God has brought into being he protects and governs by his providence, which reaches from one end of the earth to the other and orders all things well [11] . All things are open and laid bare to his eyes [12] , even those which will be brought about by the free activity of creatures. Return to Table of Contents Chapter 2 On revelation The same holy mother church holds and teaches that God, the source and end of all things, can be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason : ever since the creation of the world, his invisible nature has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. [13] It was, however, pleasing to his wisdom and goodness to reveal himself and the eternal laws of his will to the human race by another, and that a supernatural, way. This is how the Apostle puts it : In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son [14] . It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation, that those matters concerning God which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human race, be known by everyone without difficulty, with firm certitude and with no intermingling of error. It is not because of this that one must hold revelation to be absolutely necessary; the reason is that God directed human beings to a supernatural end, that is a sharing in the good things of God that utterly surpasses the understanding of the human mind; indeed eye has not seen, neither has ear heard, nor has it come into our hearts to conceive what things God has prepared for those who love him [15] . Now this supernatural revelation, according to the belief of the universal church, as declared by the sacred council of Trent, is contained in written books and unwritten traditions, which were received by the apostles from the lips of Christ himself, or came to the apostles by the dictation of the holy Spirit, and were passed on as it were from hand to hand until they reached us [16]. The complete books of the old and the new Testament with all their parts, as they are listed in the decree of the said council and as they are found in the old Latin Vulgate edition, are to be received as sacred and canonical. These books the church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and were as such committed to the church. Now since the decree on the interpretation of holy scripture, profitably made by the council of Trent, with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of christian doctrine, that meaning of holy scripture must be held to be the true one, which holy mother church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of holy scripture. In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers. Return to Table of Contents Chapter 3 On faith Since human beings are totally dependent on God as their creator and lord, and created reason is completely subject to uncreated truth, we are obliged to yield to God the revealer full submission of intellect and will by faith. This faith, which is the beginning of human salvation, the catholic church professes to be a supernatural virtue, by means of which, with the grace of God inspiring and assisting us, we believe to be true what He has revealed, not because we perceive its intrinsic truth by the natural light of reason, but because of the authority of God himself, who makes the revelation and can neither deceive nor be deceived. Faith, declares the Apostle, is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen [17]. Nevertheless, in order that the submission of our faith should be in accordance with reason, it was God's will that there should be linked to the internal assistance of the holy Spirit external indications of his revelation, that is to say divine acts, and first and foremost miracles and prophecies, which clearly demonstrating as they do the omnipotence and infinite knowledge of God, are the most certain signs of revelation and are suited to the understanding of all. Hence Moses and the prophets, and especially Christ our lord himself, worked many absolutely clear miracles and delivered prophecies; while of the apostles we read: And they went forth and preached every, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it [18] . Again it is written: We have the prophetic word made more sure; you will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place [19] . Now, although the assent of faith is by no means a blind movement of the mind, yet no one can accept the gospel preaching in the way that is necessary for achieving salvation without the inspiration and illumination of the holy Spirit, who gives to all facility in accepting and believing the truth [20] . And so faith in itself, even though it may not work through charity, is a gift of God, and its operation is a work belonging to the order of salvation, in that a person yields true obedience to God himself when he accepts and collaborates with his grace which he could have rejected. Wherefore, by divine and catholic faith all those things are to be believed which are contained in the word of God as found in scripture and tradition, and which are proposed by the church as matters to be believed as divinely revealed, whether by her solemn judgment or in her ordinary and universal magisterium. Since, then, without faith it is impossible to please God [21] and reach the fellowship of his sons and daughters, it follows that no one can ever achieve justification without it, neither can anyone attain eternal life unless he or she perseveres in it to the end. So that we could fulfil our duty of embracing the true faith and of persevering unwaveringly in it, God, through his only begotten Son, founded the church, and he endowed his institution with clear notes to the end that she might be recognised by all as the guardian and teacher of the revealed word. To the catholic church alone belong all those things, so many and so marvellous, which have been divinely ordained to make for the manifest credibility of the christian faith. What is more, the church herself by reason of her astonishing propagation, her outstanding holiness and her inexhaustible fertility in every kind of goodness, by her catholic unity and her unconquerable stability, is a kind of great and perpetual motive of credibility and an incontrovertible evidence of her own divine mission. So it comes about that, like a standard lifted up for the nations [22] , she both invites to herself those who have not yet believed, and likewise assures her sons and daughters that the faith they profess rests on the firmest of foundations. To this witness is added the effective help of power from on high. For, the kind Lord stirs up those who go astray and helps them by his grace so that they may come to the knowledge of the truth [23] ; and also confirms by his grace those whom he has translated into his admirable light [24], so that they may persevere in this light, not abandoning them unless he is first abandoned. Consequently, the situation of those, who by the heavenly gift of faith have embraced the catholic truth, is by no means the same as that of those who, led by human opinions, follow a false religion; for those who have accepted the faith under the guidance of the church can never have any just cause for changing this faith or for calling it into question. This being so, giving thanks to God the Father who has made us worthy to share with the saints in light [25] let us not neglect so great a salvation [26] , but looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith [27] , let us hold the unshakeable confession of our hope [28].Return to Table of Contents Chapter 4. On faith and reason The perpetual agreement of the catholic church has maintained and maintains this too: that there is a twofold order of knowledge, distinct not only as regards its source, but also as regards its object. With regard to the source, we know at the one level by natural reason, at the other level by divine faith. With regard to the object, besides those things to which natural reason can attain, there are proposed for our belief mysteries hidden in God which, unless they are divinely revealed, are incapable of being known. Wherefore, when the Apostle, who witnesses that God was known to the gentiles from created things [29] , comes to treat of the grace and truth which came by Jesus Christ [30] , he declares: We impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glorification. None of the rulers of this age understood this. God has revealed it to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God [31] . And the Only-begotten himself, in his confession to the Father, acknowledges that the Father has hidden these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them to the little ones [32] . Now reason, does indeed when it seeks persistently, piously and soberly, achieve by God's gift some understanding, and that most profitable, of the mysteries, whether by analogy from what it knows naturally, or from the connexion of these mysteries with one another and with the final end of humanity; but reason is never rendered capable of penetrating these mysteries in the way in which it penetrates those truths which form its proper object. For the divine mysteries, by their very nature, so far surpass the created understanding that, even when a revelation has been given and accepted by faith, they remain covered by the veil of that same faith and wrapped, as it were, in a certain obscurity, as long as in this mortal life we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, and not by sight [33] . Even though faith is above reason, there can never be any real disagreement between faith and reason, since it is the same God who reveals the mysteries and infuses faith, and who has endowed the human mind with the light of reason. God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth. The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason. Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false [34] . Furthermore the church which, together with its apostolic office of teaching, has received the charge of preserving the deposit of faith, has by divine appointment the right and duty of condemning what wrongly passes for knowledge, lest anyone be led astray by philosophy and empty deceit [35] . Hence all faithful Christians are forbidden to defend as the legitimate conclusions of science those opinions which are known to be contrary to the doctrine of faith, particularly if they have been condemned by the church; and furthermore they are absolutely bound to hold them to be errors which wear the deceptive appearance of truth. Not only can faith and reason never be at odds with one another but they mutually support each other, for on the one hand right reason established the foundations of the faith and, illuminated by its light, develops the science of divine things; on the other hand, faith delivers reason from errors and protects it and furnishes it with knowledge of many kinds. Hence, so far is the church from hindering the development of human arts and studies, that in fact she assists and promotes them in many ways. For she is neither ignorant nor contemptuous of the advantages which derive from this source for human life, rather she acknowledges that those things flow from God, the lord of sciences, and, if they are properly used, lead to God by the help of his grace. Nor does the church forbid these studies to employ, each within its own area, its own proper principles and method: but while she admits this just freedom, she takes particular care that they do not become infected with errors by conflicting with divine teaching, or, by going beyond their proper limits, intrude upon what belongs to faith and engender confusion. For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence, but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated. Hence, too,that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding. May understanding, knowledge and wisdom increase as ages and centuries roll along, and greatly and vigorously flourish, in each and all, in the individual and the whole church: but this only in its own proper kind, that is to say, in the same doctrine, the same sense, and the same understanding [36] .Return to Table of Contents CANONS 1. On God the creator of all things 1. If anyone denies the one true God, creator and lord of things visible and invisible: let him be anathema. 2. If anyone is so bold as to assert that there exists nothing besides matter: let him be anathema. 3. If anyone says that the substance or essence of God and that of all things are one and the same: let him be anathema. 4. If anyone says that finite things, both corporal and spiritual, or at any rate, spiritual, emanated from the divine substance; or that the divine essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself becomes all things or, finally, that God is a universal or indefinite being which by self determination establishes the totality of things distinct in genera, species and individuals: let him be anathema. 5. If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole substance, out of nothing by God; or holds that God did not create by his will free from all necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves himself; or denies that the world was created for the glory of God: let him be anathema. Return to Table of Contents 2. On revelation 1. If anyone says that the one, true God, our creator and lord, cannot be known with certainty from the things that have been made, by the natural light of human reason: let him be anathema. 2. If anyone says that it is impossible, or not expedient, that human beings should be taught by means of divine revelation about God and the worship that should be shown him : let him be anathema. 3. If anyone says that a human being cannot be divinely elevated to a knowledge and perfection which exceeds the natural, but of himself can and must reach finally the possession of all truth and goodness by continual development: let him be anathema. 4. If anyone does not receive as sacred and canonical the complete books of sacred scripture with all their parts, as the holy council of Trent listed them, or denies that they were divinely inspired : let him be anathema. Return to Table of Contents 3. On faith 1. If anyone says that human reason is so independent that faith cannot be commanded by God: let him be anathema. 2. If anyone says that divine faith is not to be distinguished from natural knowledge about God and moral matters, and consequently that for divine faith it is not required that revealed truth should be believed because of the authority of God who reveals it: let him be anathema. 3. If anyone says that divine revelation cannot be made credible by external signs, and that therefore men and women ought to be moved to faith only by each one's internal experience or private inspiration: let him be anathema. 4. If anyone says that all miracles are impossible, and that therefore all reports of them, even those contained in sacred scripture, are to be set aside as fables or myths; or that miracles can never be known with certainty, nor can the divine origin of the christian religion be proved from them: let him be anathema. 5. If anyone says that the assent to christian faith is not free, but is necessarily produced by arguments of human reason; or that the grace of God is necessary only for living faith which works by charity: let him be anathema. 6. If anyone says that the condition of the faithful and those who have not yet attained to the only true faith is alike, so that Catholics may have a just cause for calling in doubt, by suspending their assent, the faith which they have already received from the teaching of the church, until they have completed a scientific demonstration of the credibility and truth of their faith: let him be anathema.Return to Table of Contents 4. On faith and reason 1. If anyone says that in divine revelation there are contained no true mysteries properly so-called, but that all the dogmas of the faith can be understood and demonstrated by properly trained reason from natural principles: let him be anathema. 2. If anyone says that human studies are to be treated with such a degree of liberty that their assertions may be maintained as true even when they are opposed to divine revelation, and that they may not be forbidden by the church: let him be anathema. 3. If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands: let him be anathema. And so in the performance of our supreme pastoral office, we beseech for the love of Jesus Christ and we command, by the authority of him who is also our God and saviour, all faithful Christians, especially those in authority or who have the duty of teaching, that they contribute their zeal and labour to the warding off and elimination of these errors from the church and to the spreading of the light of the pure faith. But since it is not enough to avoid the contamination of heresy unless those errors are carefully shunned which approach it in greater or less degree, we warn all of their duty to observe the constitutions and decrees in which such wrong opinions, though not expressly mentioned in this document, have been banned and forbidden by this holy see. Return to Table of Contents SESSION 4 : 18 July 1870 First dogmatic constitution on the church of Christ Pius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an everlasting record. The eternal shepherd and guardian of our souls [37] , in order to render permanent the saving work of redemption, determined to build a church in which, as in the house of the living God, all the faithful should be linked by the bond of one faith and charity. Therefore, before he was glorified, he besought his Father, not for the apostles only, but also for those who were to believe in him through their word, that they all might be one as the Son himself and the Father are one [38] . So then, just as he sent apostles, whom he chose out of the world [39] , even as he had been sent by the Father [40], in like manner it was his will that in his church there should be shepherds and teachers until the end of time. In order, then, that the episcopal office should be one and undivided and that, by the union of the clergy, the whole multitude of believers should be held together in the unity of faith and communion, he set blessed Peter over the rest of the apostles and instituted in him the permanent principle of both unities and their visible foundation. Upon the strength of this foundation was to be built the eternal temple, and the church whose topmost part reaches heaven was to rise upon the firmness of this foundation [41] . And since the gates of hell trying, if they can, to overthrow the church, make their assault with a hatred that increases day by day against its divinely laid foundation, we judge it necessary, with the approbation of the sacred council, and for the protection, defence and growth of the catholic flock, to propound the doctrine concerning the institution, permanence and nature of the sacred and apostolic primacy, upon which the strength and coherence of the whole church depends. This doctrine is to be believed and held by all the faithful in accordance with the ancient and unchanging faith of the whole church. Furthermore, we shall proscribe and condemn the contrary errors which are so harmful to the Lord's flock. Return to Table of Contents Chapter 1 On the institution of the apostolic primacy in blessed Peter We teach and declare that, according to the gospel evidence, a primacy of jurisdiction over the whole church of God was immediately and directly promised to the blessed apostle Peter and conferred on him by Christ the lord. [PROMISED] It was to Simon alone, to whom he had already said You shall be called Cephas [42] , that the Lord, after his confession, You are the Christ, the son of the living God, spoke these words: Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the underworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven [43] . [CONFERRED] And it was to Peter alone that Jesus, after his resurrection, confided the jurisdiction of supreme pastor and ruler of his whole fold, saying: Feed my lambs, feed my sheep [44] . To this absolutely manifest teaching of the sacred scriptures, as it has always been understood by the catholic church, are clearly opposed the distorted opinions of those who misrepresent the form of government which Christ the lord established in his church and deny that Peter, in preference to the rest of the apostles, taken singly or collectively, was endowed by Christ with a true and proper primacy of jurisdiction. The same may be said of those who assert that this primacy was not conferred immediately and directly on blessed Peter himself, but rather on the church, and that it was through the church that it was transmitted to him in his capacity as her minister. Therefore, if anyone says that blessed Peter the apostle was not appointed by Christ the lord as prince of all the apostles and visible head of the whole church militant; or that it was a primacy of honour only and not one of true and proper jurisdiction that he directly and immediately received from our lord Jesus Christ himself: let him be anathema. Return to Table of Contents Chapter 2. On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ's authority, in the church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time [45] . For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the catholic church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the saviour and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the holy Roman see, which he founded and consecrated with his blood [46] . Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the church which he once received [47] . For this reason it has always been necessary for every church--that is to say the faithful throughout the world--to be in agreement with the Roman church because of its more effective leadership. In consequence of being joined, as members to head, with that see, from which the rights of sacred communion flow to all, they will grow together into the structure of a single body [48] . Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole church; or that the Roman pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema. Return to Table of Contents Chapter 3. On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman pontiff And so, supported by the clear witness of holy scripture, and adhering to the manifest and explicit decrees both of our predecessors the Roman pontiffs and of general councils, we promulgate anew the definition of the ecumenical council of Florence [49] , which must be believed by all faithful Christians, namely that the apostolic see and the Roman pontiff hold a world-wide primacy, and that the Roman pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, the prince of the apostles, true vicar of Christ, head of the whole church and father and teacher of all christian people. To him, in blessed Peter, full power has been given by our lord Jesus Christ to tend, rule and govern the universal church. All this is to be found in the acts of the ecumenical councils and the sacred canons. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the church throughout the world. In this way, by unity with the Roman pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the church of Christ becomes one flock under one supreme shepherd [50] . This is the teaching of the catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation. This power of the supreme pontiff by no means detracts from that ordinary and immediate power of episcopal jurisdiction, by which bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the apostles by appointment of the holy Spirit, tend and govern individually the particular flocks which have been assigned to them. On the contrary, this power of theirs is asserted, supported and defended by the supreme and universal pastor; for St Gregory the Great says: "My honour is the honour of the whole church. My honour is the steadfast strength of my brethren. Then do I receive true honour, when it is denied to none of those to whom honour is due." [51] Furthermore, it follows from that supreme power which the Roman pontiff has in governing the whole church, that he has the right, in the performance of this office of his, to communicate freely with the pastors and flocks of the entire church, so that they may be taught and guided by him in the way of salvation. And therefore we condemn and reject the opinions of those who hold that this communication of the supreme head with pastors and flocks may be lawfully obstructed; or that it should be dependent on the civil power, which leads them to maintain that what is determined by the apostolic see or by its authority concerning the government of the church, has no force or effect unless it is confirmed by the agreement of the civil authority. Since the Roman pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole church, we likewise teach and declare that he is the supreme judge of the faithful [52] , and that in all cases which fall under ecclesiastical jurisdiction recourse may be had to his judgment [53] . The sentence of the apostolic see (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone, nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon [54] . And so they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman pontiff. So, then, if anyone says that the Roman pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema. Return to Table of Contents Chapter 4. On the infallible teaching authority of the Roman pontiff That apostolic primacy which the Roman pontiff possesses as successor of Peter, the prince of the apostles, includes also the supreme power of teaching. This holy see has always maintained this, the constant custom of the church demonstrates it, and the ecumenical councils, particularly those in which East and West met in the union of faith and charity, have declared it. [councils] So the fathers of the fourth council of Constantinople, following the footsteps of their predecessors, published this solemn profession of faith: The first condition of salvation is to maintain the rule of the true faith. And since that saying of our lord Jesus Christ, You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church [55] , cannot fail of its effect, the words spoken are confirmed by their consequences. For in the apostolic see the catholic religion has always been preserved unblemished, and sacred doctrine been held in honour. Since it is our earnest desire to be in no way separated from this faith and doctrine, we hope that we may deserve to remain in that one communion which the apostolic see preaches, for in it is the whole and true strength of the christian religion [56] . What is more, with the approval of the second council of Lyons, the Greeks made the following profession: "The holy Roman church possesses the supreme and full primacy and principality over the whole catholic church. She truly and humbly acknowledges that she received this from the Lord himself in blessed Peter, the prince and chief of the apostles, whose successor the Roman pontiff is, together with the fullness of power. And since before all others she has the duty of defending the truth of the faith, so if any questions arise concerning the faith, it is by her judgment that they must be settled." [57] Then there is the definition of the council of Florence: "The Roman pontiff is the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole church and the father and teacher of all Christians; and to him was committed in blessed Peter, by our lord Jesus Christ, the full power of tending, ruling and governing the whole church." [58] [Holy See] To satisfy this pastoral office, our predecessors strove unwearyingly that the saving teaching of Christ should be spread among all the peoples of the world; and with equal care they made sure that it should be kept pure and uncontaminated wherever it was received.[Custom] It was for this reason that the bishops of the whole world, sometimes individually, sometimes gathered in synods, according to the long established custom of the churches and the pattern of ancient usage referred to this apostolic see those dangers especially which arose in matters concerning the faith. This was to ensure that any damage suffered by the faith should be repaired in that place above all where the faith can know no failing [59] .[Holy See] The Roman pontiffs, too, as the circumstances of the time or the state of affairs suggested, sometimes by summoning ecumenical councils or consulting the opinion of the churches scattered throughout the world, sometimes by special synods, sometimes by taking advantage of other useful means afforded by divine providence, defined as doctrines to be held those things which, by God's help, they knew to be in keeping with sacred scripture and the apostolic traditions. For the holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles. Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this see of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Saviour to the prince of his disciples: I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren [60] . This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this see so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell. But since in this very age when the salutary effectiveness of the apostolic office is most especially needed, not a few are to be found who disparage its authority, we judge it absolutely necessary to affirm solemnly the prerogative which the only-begotten Son of God was pleased to attach to the supreme pastoral office. Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the christian faith, to the glory of God our saviour, for the exaltation of the catholic religion and for the salvation of the christian people, with the approval of the sacred council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable. So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema. Return to Table of Contents FOOTNOTES 1 The Profession of faith of the other fathers added: and I pledge and swear true obedience to the Roman pontiff, successor of blessed Peter the prince of the apostles, and vicar of Jesus Christ 2 The profession of faith of the other fathers continues: my subjects, or those for whom I have responsibility in virtue of my office, hold, teach and preach the same 3 See Mt 28, 20. 4 See Heb 13, 9 5 1 Tm 2, 4. 6 Lk 19, 10. 7 Jn 11, 52. 8 See Wis 16, 12 9 Is 59, 21 10 See Lateran council IV, const. 1 (see above, p. 230). 11 Wis 8, 1. 12 Heb 4, 13. 13 Rm 1, 20. 14 Heb 1, 1-2 15 1 Cor 2, 9. 16 Council of Trent, session 4, first decree (see above p. 663). 17 Heb 11, 1 18 Mk 16, 20. 19 2 Pt 1, 19. 20 Council of Orange II(529), canon 7 (Bruns 2, 178; Msi 8, 713) 21 Heb 11, 6. 22 Is 11, 12 23 1 Tm 2, 4 24 1 Pt 2, 9; Col 1, 13 25 Col 1, 12 26 Heb 2, 3 27 Heb 12, 2 28 Heb 10, 12 29 Rm 1, 20 30 Jn 1, 17 31 i Cor 2, 7-8, 10 32 Mt 11, 25 33 2 Cor 5, 6-7 34 See Lateran council V, session 8 (see above p. 605). 35 See Col 2, 8 36 Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium (Notebook), 28 (PL 50, 668). 37 1 Pt 2,25 38 Jn 17, 20-21 39 Jn 15, 19 40 Jn 20, 21 41 Leo 1, Serm. (Sermons), 4 (elsewhere 3), ch. 2 for the day of his birth (PL 54, 150). 42 Jn 1, 42. 43 Mt 16, 16 19 44 Jn 21, 15-17 45 See Mt 7, 25; Lk 6, 48 46 From the speech of Philip, the Roman legate, at the 3rd session of the council of Ephesus (D no. 112). 47 Leo 1, Serm. (Sermons), 3 (elsewhere 2), ch. 3 (PL 54, 146). 48 Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. (Against Heresies) 1113 (PG 7, 849), Council of Aquilea (381), to be found among: Ambrose, Epistolae (Letters), 11 (PL 16, 946). 49 Council of Florence, session 6 (see above p. 528). 50 See Jn 10, 16. 51 Ep. ad Eulog. Alexandrin. (Letter to Eulogius of Alexandria), Vlll 29 (30) (MGH, Ep. 2, 31 28-30, PL 77, 933). 52 Pius VI, Letter Super soliditate dated 28 Nov. 1786. 53 From Michael Palaeologus's profession of faith which was read out at the second council of Lyons (D no. 466). 54 Nicholas 1, Ep. ad Michaelem imp. (Letter to the emperor Michael) (PL 119, 954). 55 Mt 16, 18. 56 From Pope Hormisdas's formula of the year 517 (D no. 171), see above p. 157 n. 1. 57 From Michael Palaeologus's profession of faith which was read out at the second council of Lyons (D no. 466). 58 Council of Florence, session 6 (see above p. 528). S Bernard, Ep. (Letters) 190 (PL 182, 1053). 59 Bernard, Ep. (Letters) 190 (PL 182, 1053). 60 Lk 22, 32.