Translated from the
original by Costas Balomenos
As is known, the two most determinant factors that were
the cause to become the schism in the Christian Church and thus be divided into
East and West, have been the "papal
primacy", i.e. the claim of
the Pope of Rome to be
recognized by all as visible head of the Church and delegate of Christ
on earth and to have the authority over the other
Churches and «Filioque».
But what does it mean «Filioque»; The word is Latin. Is
a compound word consisting of Filius =
son and que = and, and
all together mean "and from the
Son". It is mentioned from
whom emanates the Holy Spirit. But let's be more detailed and therefore more
understandable...
In the "Symbol of Faith" and better known as "I believe", we confess our
faith by saying "... and in the Holy
Spirit ... the emanating from the Father". In this sentence,
the Westerners have added and
the word Filioque, namely that the Holy Spirit proceeds not only from the
Father and the Son. Thus, according to the Western Church
- at this point - the "Symbol of Faith"
was reformed: "... and in the Holy
Spirit ... from the Father and the Son emanating".
This may seem a detail without substance, but it is
very important, because it removes the uniqueness of each person of the Holy Trinity. The Trinity is perfect communion
of three Persons (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) equal,
each of which is unique and unrepeatable, that each having some features
exclusively its own. One such feature
is that from the Father emanates the Holy Spirit.
But if we say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, then it is as if we
identify the Father and the Son. In this case is altered the doctrine of Holy
Trinity since each person of this cease to be treated unique and unrepeatable.
There will not stick more to the theological issues of
Filioque, something that are likely be our future work, but we will stand in
the historical origins of this and particularly in what is obvious to the
researcher of this period, the progressive alienation of the two sides,
resulting the schism to
ratify through time more and make evident this alienation.
At the time
that the Apostle Paul and the other Apostles were traveling in the
Mediterranean world for spreading the Christian message, were moving within a tight-knit political and cultural
unity, which was none other than the Roman Empire .
This Empire had the great
advantage of "embracing" many different ethnic groups, even though
these groups were speaking different languages and dialects. But all that was
ruling by the same Emperor. Throughout the Empire was a scattered Graeco-Roman
culture, in which the educated participated. The Greek and Latin spoken
everywhere in the Empire, and were not a few, these who had the option to speak
both languages. So all these advantages have contributed and helped a lot in
spreading of the first Christian Church.
With the passage of time and in the centuries that followed, this unity of
the Mediterranean world gradually has disappeared. First was lost political
unity, because since the end of the third century, the Empire, while still
theoretically was remaining united, it was divided into two parts, in the
eastern and western, each under its own Emperor. Constantine the Great continued this division process by founding a second imperial capital in the east, parallel to Old Rome in Italy . This process was
completed, with the barbarian invasions in the beginning
of fifth century in the western part of the Empire and the catalysis and sacking of Rome in 455 AD by the Vandals. Except from a substantial partion (the southern) of Italy , which
was remaining for a little more time in the Empire, the western partion of he
shared among barbarian chiefs.
However, the Byzantines, who of course considered they were Roman citizens, they never forgot
the Roman ideals of the Augustan era and have continued
to consider the Empire - even occupied by the barbarians - theoretically
as ecumenical and theirs. Justinian was the last Emperor, who tried seriously with
the wars that made in the West and Africa , to bridge the gap between theory and practice.
After some successes that had and the regaining some territories, definitively he abandoned
these conquests in the West. Then, the political unity of the Greek East and
the Latin West completely destroyed by the barbarian invasions and never
restored.
At the end of the sixth century, the East and the West were alienated even
more because of the invasion of Avars and Slavs in the Balkan
peninsula . The Illyria, that was useful as a bridge between Byzantium and the Latin world, after it
became a barrier. The rupture was further extended
with the rise of Islam, because the Mediterranean sea ,
which the Romans were saying it "mare
nostrum", now the most part of this came under the control of the Arabs.
Of course, despite all these difficulties and obstacles, cultural and economic
contacts between the eastern and western Mediterranean
never stopped entirely, but they were made very difficult.
In addition to these, an ecclesiastical
event came to be added and to grow more the division and estrangement between Byzantium and the West. The Popes - from the
outset - firmly supported the views of iconolaters, and so for many decades were found outside of society and in a regime of hostility, with the
Iconoclasts Emperors and Patriarchs of Constantinople. So, disfellowshipped from Byzantium and having need of help for its
survival, the Pope Stephen, in 754 he turned
north and visited Pipinos ruler of the Franks. This event marked
the first step in a change of direction with decisive significance, at least with regard to Papism. Until then, Rome was continuing -
ecclesiastically least – to be considered part of the Byzantine world, but now
gradually was passing into Frankish sphere of influence, although the results
of this reorientation were not fully visible and perceived before the middle of
the eleventh century.
After the visit of Pope Stephen in Pipinos, half a
century later, came to be
added a much more dramatic event. On the day of Christmas of the year
800, Pope Leo III, he crowns Charles the Great (Charlemagne) Emperor, as king
of the Franks. Charlemagne to be valid his coronation, pursues its recognition
by the Byzantine ruler, who was then a woman, Irene the Athenian, asking her in
marriage to unite the two kingdoms, but without success. And it happened
because the Byzantines, insisting still to the principle of imperial unity,
they considered Charlemagne as an intruder and the coronation made by the Pope
as an act of schism within the Empire.
Thus, in the West created the Holy Roman Empire, which instead of
bringing Europe closer contributed to the
greater alienation between East and West.
Of course, the cultural unity between the two sides has continued but it was obvious that it had weakened
considerably. In East and West, people of letters still were living within the
classical tradition that the Church had recruited and appropriated. But with
the passage of time gradually they began to interpret this tradition quite
differently. Another big issue that was arised and has complicated most the
things was and the problem with the language, because the
time had passed, when the educated people of both sides were bilingual.
After the year 450, very few people in Western Europe
were those who could read Greek, and after the year 600, although Byzantium
(new word of modern times) were called even Roman Empire, it was rare
phenomenon that someone Byzantine to speak Latin i.e. the language of the
Romans. It is said that the Great Photios, the leading scholar of the ninth century
in Constantinople , could not read Latin. And
in the 864 a "Roman" emperor of Byzantium ,
Michael III, called the language written by Virgil as "barbarian and
Scythian language".
Usually, when the Greeks were wished to read Latin
works or the Latins to read Greek works, were using translations, although most
of the time they did nothing. Michael Psellos, an eminent Greek scholar of the
eleventh century, had such a nebulous knowledge of Latin literature, so to
confuse Caesar with Cicero .
The Greek East and the Latin West, because they did depended from the same
sources and did not read the same books, were removed even further from each
other.
The fact that the cultural renaissance of the Courtyard
of Charlemagne was marked from the outset by a strong anti-Greek prejudice,
although negative, remains important. In Europe of the fourth century there was
a unified Christian civilization,
but in Europe in the thirteenth century there
were two. Exactly during the reign of Charlemagne
- perhaps for the first time - it became discernible
the schism between the two cultures. The
Byzantines for their part were closeted to their
own ideological world and did almost no step to meet the West halfway. Also, in
the ninth century, they were unable to take as seriously deserved the western education. As
barbarians characterized the Franks and nothing more.
These political and cultural factors were therefore not
possible to not affect the life of the Church and to make the religious unity even more uncertain. The cultural
and political alienation can easily lead to ecclesiastical wrangles, as shown by the case of Charlemagne, because
when Irene (the Byzantine empress) refused to recognize him in the political
sphere, then he hastened to avenge on charges of heresy against the Byzantine Church . Specifically, denounced the Greeks for not using of the Filioque in the Creed and did not accept the
decisions of the Seventh Ecumenical Council for the
restoration the images. But it is true that Charlemagne was informed of
these decisions through a mistranslation, which seriously was changing their true meaning. In any case it
seems that his views were semi - iconoclastic. With this attitude of
Charlemagne, was putting the
bases to tear the "non-sewn chiton of Christ"
(Church), which was performed a half centuries
later (in 1054), with the schism of Eastern and Western Church .
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Callistus Ware, «The
Orthodox Church".
2. Religious
School Manual “Church,
the new society in course", Third Grade, Junior High school, 1999.
Writer Christos Pal
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου