0
You're a little confused, which is understandable, but there is no "Roman Catholic", that is a misnomer from the time of the protestant revolt, which has become so popular in English that even some Catholics use it, but it is intended as a slur. The Catholic Church was established by Jesus Christ from the cross, and shown to the world at Pentecost. Despite many difficulties over the centuries, the Church was always one, up until the 11th century, when the Orthodox churches no longer paid allegiance to the Pope in Rome. After this time, all of the Orthodox national churches split, and part remained with Rome, and part separated due to national interests, thus there is not the Greek Orthodox Church and the Greek Uniate Church, the later looks exactly the same but is in union with Rome. For a thorough discussion of the issues involved and why they separated, please see Vladimir Soloviev's book The Russian Church and the Papacy. Soloviev discusses all the Orthodox churches and the reasons for the split in his book, as he was raised in the Russian Orthodox Church he has an insider's view on what went on. See the link below.
Essentially there were two main issues that separated the two churches. One is an expression of the nature of Christ within the Nicene Creed. The difference is both highly academic but at the same time fundamentally different. The Orthodox believe that the Holy Spirit comes from God the Father alone while the Catholic rendering of the Nicene Creed says that the Holy Spirit comes from both God the Father and God the Son. There is debate to this day if that is what the Catholic Church intended to say, but the words are still used today. The second issue is that of the authority of the Pope of Rome. The Roman Pope (who incidentally is not the only Pope, there are Popes within the Orthodox church, but it is an honorary title as opposed to a singular position) was, at the time of the schism, of the opinion that he was the head of the world wide church and that his word was final on all matters. The Orthodox Patriarchs (roughly the same as the Pope) believed that the Pope in Rome was and had always been a first among equals, an honorary position, but not one of absolute authority.
The ''schism'' (division) happened in 1054 when the heads of several western churches (mainly in Rome) wanted essentially to relocate the ''capital'' of Christiandom from Constantinople to Rome. The main reason was power and money, as Rome saw its influence in the west steadily increasing and Constantinople's withering. The Patriarch Celarius didnt want to give up the power nor the money. The given reason was the ''filioque clause'', not even then a subject worthy of a schism and the papal primacy, Pope's infallibility on subjects of faith, something that both sides knew they couldnt agree on, ensuring the outcome.
The churches split over a number of issues: religious ones like "what is the source of the Holy Spirit?" en political ones like whether Rome or Constantinople was the capital city of Christendom and whether the Pope had any jurisdiction over the Patriarch and priests of the Church of Constantinople.
Basically, it was a power struggle. Constantinople, the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire, was a strong and powerful Empire, while Rome, the 'former' capital city of what once was the Western Roman Empire was in full decline. So Constantinople thought the Roman pope had nothing to shout about and was certainly not in a position to dictate how the heads and priests (and people) of Constantinople should live, believe and think. That would also have undercut the Emperor's prestige and power.
Things came to a head when the Patriarch of Constantinople ordered the closure of all Roman Catholic churches and when delegates from the Pope came to Constantinople and excommunicated the Emperor. For the Emperor, that was sufficient reason to see the split as final and to declare that from now on, the Eastern ("Orthodox") Church would be the only one recognized in his empire and that only the religious rules set by the Patriarch would be valid.
Presumably you are referring to the East-West schism between the Eastern (Greek) and the Western (Latin) churches of Christianity, which originally considered themselves as two branches of the same creed (the Nicene Creed). Rome was the headquarters of Western Christianity. Constantinople was the seat of the Patriarch of Constantinople, the only surviving head of the Eastern Church (the seats other Patriarchs, Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria, had filled to the Arab conquerors) and the capital of the Byzantine Empire. The spit between these two churches was the culmination of centuries of tensions between them. These two churches then came to be called Catholic and Orthodox respectively.
Some of the tensions between the two churches started with the fall of the western part of the Roman Empire in the late fifth century due to the invasions by the Germanic peoples. The eastern part of this empire was not affected by these invasions and continued to exist for nearly 1,000 years. Historians have coined the term Byzantine Empire to indicate the eastern part of the Roman Empire after the fall of the western part. The communication which had existed between these two churches when they were both under the same empire broke down and they developed different rites and doctrinal stances, which were to lead to theological tensions.
There were also political complications. In the east, the emperor Justinian I (reigned 527-565) established what has been called caesaropapism. The emperor was effectively in charge of the Eastern Church. He regulated canonical law, liturgy and the clergy and dictated theology. The Byzantines conquered central Italy when they expelled the Ostrogoths from Italy. Rome was part of these possessions. The Bishop of Rome (the Pope) resented interference by the emperor in the affairs of the Western Church and fought for independence. There were also disputes over which of the two churches should have jurisdiction in areas of Italy, Sicily and the Balkan Peninsula.
One example of this tension is that the pope opted for tolerance of the Arianism of the Ostrogoths in opposition to the caesaropapism of the emperor. (Arian Christianity was a dissident Christian doctrine which had been suppressed for quite some time by the emperors). Later, the Pope made an alliance with the new king of the Franks, Pepin, against the Lombards who had invaded Italy and were threatening Rome. Pepin defeated the Lombards and donated the previously Byzantine-held Duchy of Rome to the Pope. In 800 the Pope crowned the son of Pepin, Charlemagne, emperor of the Romans. This was aimed at asserting the independence of Western Christianity form the Byzantine Empire and, by extension, the Eastern Church.
A council of the church (the Quinisext Council) which was held in Constantinople in 692 was also a source of tension between the two churches. It issued new canons (church regulations). Some of these were aimed at settling differences between Eastern and Western church practices regarding liturgy and clerical discipline. It was held under Byzantine auspices, and it was attended only by the Eastern clergy. The canons regarded the customs of the Church of Constantinople as the orthodox practice and condemned practices in use in the Western Church. In Rome, Pope Sergius I rejected the council. Emperor Justinian II ordered his arrest, but a Byzantine militia which was sent to Rome to arrest him was repelled.
There was also a major theological dispute over the flioloque. This was a Latin translation of the text of Nicene Creed (a creed which had been established at the first ecumenical council in Nicaea in 325 and to which both churches subscribed). It included the words "and the Son" (Jesus) in a sentence which did not exist in the original Greek text. This translation was rejected by the Eastern Church, which thought it led to a misinterpretation of the nature of the Holy trinity. Its official endorsement by the Popes in 1014 intensified this controversy.
Leo IX, who became pope in 1049, claimed he held authority over the four Eastern patriarchs. The Eastern Church rejected this claim. In 1054 the pope and the Patriarch of Constantinople excommunicated each other. Historians see this year as the date of the schism between these two churches. Attempts to heal this rift were made over the centuries, but failed.
from A Catholic Dictionary, edited by Donald Attwater, Second edition, revised 1957
The Schism of the East the estrangement and severance from the Holy See of what is now called the Orthodox Eastern Church was a gradual process extending over centuries. After a number of minor schisms the first serious, though short, break was that of Photius; from then on tension between East and West increased, and the schism of Cerularius occurred in 1054. From then on the breach gradually widened and has been definitive since 1472. There was a formal union from the 2nd Council of Lyons in 1274 until 1282, and a more promising one after the Council of Florence from 1439 to 1472. After the capture of Constantinople it was in the Turkish interest to reopen and widen the breach with the powerful Roman church; the patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem were dragged into this policy, Russia and the Slav churches stood out the longest of any: none of these churches, except Constantinople itself in 1472, formally and definitely broke away from the unity of the Church. But in the course of centuries the schism has set and crystallized into a definite separation from the Holy See of many million people with a true priesthood and valid sacraments. The origins, causes and development of the schism are matters of much complication, still not fully unraveled.
It was not a split, the Eastern Orthodox left the Catholic Church over a number of issues, unfortunately, most of them were political. Over time, they have assigned some religious issues, but for the main part, they were political.
from A Catholic Dictionary, edited by Donald Attwater, Second edition, revised 1957
The Schism of the East the estrangement and severance from the Holy See of what is now called the Orthodox Eastern Church was a gradual process extending over centuries. After a number of minor schisms the first serious, though short, break was that of Photius; from then on tension between East and West increased, and the schism of Cerularius occurred in 1054. From then on the breach gradually widened and has been definitive since 1472. There was a formal union from the 2nd Council of Lyons in 1274 until 1282, and a more promising one after the Council of Florence from 1439 to 1472. After the capture of Constantinople it was in the Turkish interest to reopen and widen the breach with the powerful Roman church; the patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem were dragged into this policy, Russia and the Slav churches stood out the longest of any: none of these churches, except Constantinople itself in 1472, formally and definitely broke away from the unity of the Church. But in the course of centuries the schism has set and crystallized into a definite separation from the Holy See of many million people with a true priesthood and valid sacraments. The origins, causes and development of the schism are matters of much complication, still not fully unraveled.
from Modern Catholic Dictionary by John A. Hardon, S.J. Doubleday & Co., Inc. Garden City, NY 1980
Separation of the Christian Churches of the East from unity with Rome. The schism was centuries in the making and finally became fixed in 1054, when the Patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Cerularisu (died 1059), was excommunicated by the papal legates for opposing the use of leavened bread by the Latin Church and removing the Pope's name from the diptychs or list of persons to be prayed for in the Eucharistic liturgy. A temporary reunion with Rome was effected by the Second Council of Lyons (1274) and the Council of Florence (1439) but never stabilized
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What slogan is good for Constantinople?
Constantinople was given the titles of "the new, second New Rome," "Alma Roma", "Eastern Rome" and "Roma Constantinopolitana."
Which Roman emperor moved the capital of the Empire to Byzantium?
The emperor Constantine I (or the Great) did not move the imperial capital of the roman Empire from Rome to Byzantium. He moved the imperial capital of the eastern part of the Roman Empire from Nicomedia (in north-western Turkey) to the nearby Byzantium, which he redeveloped and renamed after himself -- Constantinople (City of Constantine). Milan remained the imperial capital of the western part of the empire.Nicomedia and Milan had been designated as the imperial capitals of the east and west respectively by the emperor Diocletian. Rome had already ceased to be the imperial capital before Constantine.
What city was the center of the roman empire?
United Empire: Rome Western Empire: Rome then Ravenna Eastern Empire: Constantinople
Where did Constantinople more the capital of the Roman Empire and why?
Emperor Constantine the Great moved the capital of the Byzantine/Roman Empire from Rome to Constantinople around 330 AD. He felt that Rome was an unsatisfactory capital. Rome was too far from the frontiers. Constantinople provided easy trade and military access to the Mediterranean, Black Sea, Danube River, Dnieper River, and the land route to Turkestan and India.
In what three ways did scholars return to learning from the Greeks and Romans?
First, the artist and scholars a of Italy drew inspiration from the ruins of Rome that surrounded them. Second,Western scholars studied ancient Latin manuscripts that had been preserved in monasteries. Third, Christians scholars scholars in Constantinople fled to Rome with Greek Manuscripts when the Turks conquered Constantinople in 1423.
Why did the curch in constantinople and the curch split in rome?
because
How many empires did Rome split into?
The Roman Empire split into two pieces, the Western Empire whose capitol was still in Rome, and the Eastern with its capitol in Constantinople, modern Istanbul.
How far is rome from constantinople?
Rome is 854 miles away from Constantinople
How is Rome different from Constantinople?
Constantinople was based on the Christian religion and Rome was against it.
Why might that split have weakened the Rome empire?
Because the Muslims invaded Constantinople so they took over. Your welcome hope that this was helpful.
What direction was the capital of Constantinople from Rome?
Constantinople was approximately 800 miles east from Rome.
What was Diocletian's answer the saving empire?
He basically split the empire in half east and west. The east's capital was Rome and the west's was the city later called Constantinople.
Which lasted longest as center of an empire rome or constantinople?
Rome
Similarities of Constantinople and Rome?
Both Rome and Constantinople had written laws. Emperor Justinian of Constantinople wrote the Corpus Julius Civilius which was based off the Roman written codes. Also Rome and Constantinople both practiced Christianity. Although Rome followed the Roman Catholicism and Constantinople followed the Eastern Orthodox Church, these are still from the same roots of the belief of Christianity. Also the idea of domes were used by both Rome and Constantinople. Rome had built the "Pantheon" and Constantinople built the Hagia Sophia. Emperor Justinian of Constantinople built the domes even bigger by using the quadrangle underneath the domes. Also both Rome and Constantinople were involved in trade and cultural diffusion with other countries.
What was Constantinople the center of?
Rome and Constantinople became centers of Christianity. Rome became the center of Western Catholic Christianity and Constantinople became the center of Eastern, Orthodox Christianity
Which city was the capital city of the Roman Empire?
The capital of the Roman empire was Rome and later Ravinia, in the West. In the East it was Constantinople.
What was the capital city's for east Rome and west Rome?
Eastern Rome was Rome and western Rome was Constantinople
