January 1988 Print

The following story from the Religious News Service, or a similar story, has appeared in many major newspapers around the world. Pope John Paul II has been striving to bring the schismatic Eastern Orthodox into full communion with Rome. We agree of course with this desire, but not with his method. The Greek Schismatics reject that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son in the Blessed Trinity, and only admit a procession from the Father. In the spirit of compromise Pope John Paul left this portion out of the Creed in a public profession of Faith. (See story below) Many Catholics do not know much, if anything about the Greek Schism, so following the RNS report we are adding a relatively brief history of the Greek Schism, followed by an explanation of the Holy Ghost's procession from the Father and the Son.

 

Rome and Eastern Orthodox Take Major Step Toward Unity
By Sari Gilbert (RNS Correspondent)

VATICAN CITY (RNS) — The five-day visit here of the patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Church has allowed Pope John Paul II to make one of the Roman Catholic Church's most significant ecumenical gestures. Observers said the visit represented a giant step toward the re-establishment of communion between the two churches after more than 900 years of division.

Serious issues remain to be resolved, however, before such union can be achieved.

The visit ended December 9 with a joint declaration of ecumenical commitment signed by both the pope and Patriarch Dimitrios I of Constantinople, who was making his first trip to Rome. The statement, signed at the Vatican guest house in St. John's Tower, condemned proselytizing between the two churches and expressed hope that continued dialogue would lead to full communion.

"We hope for the day, wanted by God, in which the Eucharist will be celebrated in renewed faith and in which full communion will be re-established with a concelebration of the Eucharist," said the statement.

But observers here pointed out that ceremonies in St. Peter's Basilica on Sunday already represented an enormous stride forward in the struggle for church unity. The two men walked up the nave of the Basilica together, kneeled together at the tomb of Saint Peter. During the pope's speech, John Paul was flanked by the patriarch, who sat in an identical chair in front of the Basilica's Altar of the Confession.

Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are not now allowed to celebrate the entire Mass/Divine Liturgy together. For the first time in almost a millennium, the two men recited the Liturgy of the Word together, reading the Gospel in both Latin and Greek. Together they recited the Creed, in its original pre-schism form (that is without the expression "Filioque," which because of an intricate theological dispute, was an immediate cause for the divisions). And when, as the Pope was preparing to say the words of consecration for the Eucharist, the patriarch got up to leave the altar, John Paul came forward and folded him in a spontaneous embrace.

After the Mass, in an unprecedented move, the two men appeared together on the Basilica's outside balcony to address a crowd of 40,000 in the square below in separate speeches and a joint benediction.

It was the first time that anyone else has spoken from that balcony together with the pope. And taken together with the respectful tone of the entire visit, the gesture indicated that the pope sees Constantinople (today Istanbul) as a true "sister church."

Starting next June, a joint commission will consider the problems still standing in the way of reunion. The major difficulties are represented by the role of the Bishop of Rome (the pope), with his primacy over the entire church, and the consequent dogma of papal infallibility as established by the First Vatican Council.

The Orthodox churches have made it clear that they would be willing to recognize a "primacy of honor" for the Roman Pontiff. But for Rome this does not appear sufficient.

The pope sought to deal with the issue by pointing out that prior to the 1054 schism, (when the modus vivendi of the two churches was that each followed its own path, while maintaining communion in faith and sacramental life) the Church of Rome already had a special responsibility, both in organizing charitable works and in maintaining the union of the various churches.

The pope also admitted that Roman Catholic pontiffs had not always exercised that role properly, that is as a service to be offered rather than as a dominating position. But he made it clear that Rome holds its special role dear. "It is out of desire to truly obey the will of Christ that I recognize myself, as Bishop of Rome, as called to exercise that mission," the pope said December 6.

At the same time, John Paul appeared to be leaving the door open for real compromise. In the final passage of his speech, he asked the Holy Spirit "to provide light for all the shepherds and theologians of our churches so that we can search, clearly together, the forms in which this ministry can carry out a service of love that is recognized by both sides."

 

A Brief History of the Greek Schism
From Church History by Rev. John Laux, M.A. Benziger Bros. 1934.

Peace had scarcely been restored between the East and the West by the Seventh Ecumenical Council of Nicea in 787 when an event occurred which not only greatly complicated, but also embittered their relations. The event was the coronation of Charlemagne as Roman Emperor by Pope St. Leo III on Christmas Day of the year 800. No single event, some historians claim, alienated the East so forcibly from the West. By it the age-long rivalry was turned into positive hatred. It was not a question of religion, but of national pride. That Rome should be detached from the Roman Empire; that Rome should be place under the yoke of barbarians; that Rome should be no longer Roman–this appeared a monstrous thing indeed to the Eastern mind; and the Pope of Rome was responsible for this unpardonable crime! The Eastern Emperors retaliated by definitively detaching the provinces of Illyricum from the jurisdiction of the Roman See, and also the bishoprics of Sicily and lower Italy. "These provinces," says a Greek writer of the ninth century, "have been annexed to the Patriarch of Constantinople because the Pope of ancient Rome is in the hands of the barbarians." From now on, it was only a question of time when the whole East would refuse to obey the "barbarian" head of Christendom.

The Photian Schism. – In the middle of the ninth century a patriarch of Constantinople made the first deliberate attempt to sever the Greek Church from the West by appealing to the national pride of his countrymen. This man was Photius.

St. Theodora, Empress, had re-established the Catholic Faith in the East in 842. (The East had been troubled by the Iconoclasts who rejected the veneration of icons and other holy images.) All went well until her son Michael, known in history as "the Drunkard," came of age and began to reign. This sensual prince fell entirely under the influence of his uncle Bardas, a profligate of the most despicable character, who lived in sin with one of his near relatives. On the feast of the Epiphany, 857, St. Ignatius, who had succeeded St. Methodius as patriarch of Constantinople in 846, refused to give Bardas Holy Communion. Ignatius was arrested and imprisoned, and upon refusing to resign his office was illegally deposed, while Photius, a layman, was installed as patriarch in his place.

Photius was easily the most learned man of his time, as his monumental work, the Bibliotheca, which consists of abridgements of and extracts from 280 volumes of classical authors, amply testifies. But even his greatest admirers admit that he was worldly, crafty, ambitious and unscrupulous. When he saw that his usurpation caused discontent among the clergy and the people, he persuaded the Emperor to send ambassadors with costly presents to Pope St. Nicholas I in order to secure his approbation. In spite of false statements made by the ambassadors–hey said that Ignatius had resigned his see because of his advanced age, and voluntarily retired into a monastery–the Pope refused to decide until he had investigated the matter. The legates whom he sent to Constantinople for this purpose, yielding to threats of bribery, acknowledged Photius as lawful patriarch. But Nicholas saw through their deceit, and in a letter to the Eastern bishops condemned and deposed Photius. The rage of the proud intruder knew no bounds. "In a letter to all the patriarchs and bishops of the East he railed against all claim to spiritual authority on the part of the Holy See, declaring it intolerable, above all, since the imperial crown of the West had been set by Leo III on the head of Charlemagne, a barbarian Frank." He accused the Latin Church of heresy for adding the word "Filioque" ("and from the Son") to the Nicene Creed, and attacked the discipline and the usages of the Latins, particularly their practice of fasting on Saturday, their use of milk and cheese on fast days, and the enforced celibacy of the clergy. His hatred of Rome at last led him to do what none of his predecessors had dared to do: he excommunicated the whole Latin world and pronounced sentence of deposition against Pope Nicholas (867).

The triumph of the arrogant patriarch was short-lived. The drunken and vicious Emperor over whom he had held sway so long was murdered in 867. Basil, his murderer and successor, cast Photius into prison and reinstated Ignatius. A Council–the Eighth Ecumenical–which, assembled at Constantinople in 869, condemned Photius and his sacrilegious acts, and restored union under the authority of the Apostolic See. After the death of Ignatius in 877 Photius again ascended the patriarchal throne, and in order to be approved by Pope John VIII professed in express terms to acknowledge the Roman Primacy. He soon broke his word and was excommunicated once more. He ended ingloriously. In 886 the Emperor Leo the Philosopher deprived him of his office and banished him to a monastery in Armenia. After this, we hear no more of him.

The Final Separation. – For the next hundred and fifty years there was almost unbroken communion between Constantinople and Rome, but no real peace. The disreputable state into which the Papacy fell during this period did much to impair its prestige in the East. It only required another Photius to kindle the smoldering ashes of the old dissension into a devastating flame. The new Photius appeared in the person of the Patriarch Michael Cerularius. Cerularius was as proud and ambitious as Photius, but with none of his learning and cleverness. It was he who inspired the infamous letter sent by Bishop Leo of Achrida to the West. In this letter the use of unleavened bread in the Holy Eucharist is declared to be Jewish and invalid, and the Latins are reproached in unmeasured terms for fasting on Saturdays, for eating things strangled and blood, for omitting the Alleluia during Lent, for shaving their beards, and for other divergencies from Eastern customs. Cerularius himself closed the churches of the Latins in Constantinople and impiously ordered the Blessed Sacrament to be cast out and trodden under foot as invalid. At the request of the Emperor Constantine Monomachus, who earnestly desired peace, Pope St. Leo IX sent three legates to Constantinople, but Cerularius obstinately refused to receive them. Thereupon they laid the document containing his excommunication on the altar of St. Sophia in the presence of the clergy and the people with the words "Let God be the Judge," and immediately left the city. It was the 16th of July, 1054.

All attempts made in later times by Popes, Emperors, and Councils to reunite the East and West were frustrated by the incurable narrow-minded hatred of the Eastern bishops, clergy, and people.

 

An explanation of the "Filioque"

Since Pope John Paul II by omitting this word in the Creed seems to consider it a moot point in the reunion of the Latin and Greek Churches, it seems a little discussion of the "Filioque" is in order.

First of all, when the Latin Church added the word to the Creed, it was not stating anything new, but only publicly expressing doctrine that had always been believed in the Church concerning the Holy Trinity. In the Athanasian Creed, which dates back to the fourth century, it is stated: "The Holy Ghost is from the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding." The Church Fathers echo this teaching in their writings. St. Augustine said, "we believe that the Holy Ghost proceeds also from the Son, since also He is the Spirit of the Son." But the Greeks will admit that this was indeed taught by the Latin Fathers of the Church. Hence, we quote especially some Greek Fathers of the Church (all of whom lived in the fifth or fourth century). St. Cyril of Alexandria stated, "The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son and the Father. St. Gregory of Nyssa compared the Blessed Trinity to three lights, of which the second comes from the first and the third from the second.

The Fathers were only basing their words on what was already in Sacred Scripture, for the procession of the Holy Ghost is sufficiently spoken of there.

The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son because He is called the Spirit of the Son; Gal. IV, 6: God hath sent the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying: Abba, Father. Rom. VIII, 9: If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.

More clearly, the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son since He is sent by the Son; John XV,26: When the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father . . . John XVI, 7: If I go, I will send Him to you. John XX,22: He (Jesus) breathed on them; and He said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost.

Finally, the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son because He receives from the Son; John XVI, 14-15: He (the Paraclete) shall glorify me; because he shall receive of mine, and shall show it to you. All things whatsoever the Father hath, are mine. Therefore I said, that he shall receive of mine, and show it to you.

What is more, and of the utmost importance, is that Pope Gregory X at the II Council of Lyons in 1274 condemned those who deny the "Filioque":

In faithful and devout profession we declare that the Holy Ghost proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two beginnings, but from one beginning, not from two breathings but from one breathing. The most holy Roman Church, the mother and teacher of all the faithful, has up to this time professed, preached, and taught this; this she firmly holds, preaches, declares, and teaches; the unchangeable and true opinion of the orthodox Fathers and Doctors, Latin as well as Greek, holds this. But because some through ignorance of the irresistible aforesaid truth have slipped into various errors, we in our desire to close the way to errors of this kind, with the approval of the sacred Council, condemn and reject (those) who presume to deny that the Holy Ghost proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son; as well as (those) who with rash boldness presume to declare that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two beginnings, and not as from one.

Besides condemning those who taught contrary to this doctrine, the Church positively defined the "Filioque" at the Council of Florence in 1439. In his Bull "Laetentur coeli", Pope Eugenius IV declared:

…with the approbation of this holy general Council of Florence we define that this truth of faith [The procession of the Holy Ghost from both the Father and the Son] be believed and accepted by all Christians, and that all likewise profess that the Holy Ghost is eternally from the Father and the Son and has His essence and His subsistent being both from the Father and the Son, and proceeds from both eternally as from one principle and one spiration; we declare that what the holy Doctors and Fathers say, namely, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father through the Son, tends to this meaning, that by this it is signified that the Son also is the cause, according to the Greeks, and according to the Latins, the principle of the subsistence of the Holy Ghost, as is the Father also. And that all things, which are the Father's, the Father Himself has given in begetting His only Son; without being Father, the Son sees this from the Father, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son from whom He was moreover eternally begotten. We define in addition that the explanation of the words "Filioque" for the sake of declaring the truth and also because of imminent necessity has been lawfully and reasonably added to the Creed.

With all due respect to the Holy Father, to deliberately omit the Truth in the name of Ecumenism is a grave error. There can never be true unity except in God Who is Truth Itself. The Holy Ghost has spoken through the words of Pope Gregory X and Pope Eugenius IV to declare the "Filioque" as a dogma of the Faith, and as such to be accepted and believed by all Christians. One cannot omit a single article of the Faith and still call himself a Catholic. Hence the Greeks must accept this doctrine and every dogma the Church has laid down. Hopefully Pope John Paul will realize this too and not do something so scandalous as to actually omit an article of our Profession of Faith!