Did the Catholic Church break off from the other Apostolic Patriarchates?


#1

This is what I read:
If you are Roman Catholic, your church shared the same rich apostolic and doctrinal heritage as the Orthodox Church for the first thousand years of its history, since during the first millennium they were one and the same Church. Lamentably, in 1054, the Pope of Rome broke away from the other four Apostolic Patriarchates (which include Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem), by tampering with the Original Creed of the Church, and considering himself to be infallible. Thus your church is 1,000 years old.

Is this true?


#2

No! Both sides are to blame,not the CC or EO Church…BOTH! Period!


#3

So the Pope of Rome broke away from the other 4, interesting. thank you.


#4

No. Both churches had a schism. You will hear from Orthodox Christians that Catholics broke away from the One Church, and you will hear Catholics say that the Orthodox broke away from the One Church. Fact of the matter is that both sides just simoutaneously split.


#5

[quote="Luvtosew, post:3, topic:277321"]
So the Pope of Rome broke away from the other 4, interesting. thank you.

[/quote]

Did you know that the Orthodox, whom you suddenly appreciate, have even more books in their bible, confession to a priest, the Eucharist, and even more devotion to Mary than the horrible old Catholic Church? Now what?


#6

Just over the change in the Creed?


#7

No, the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church subsists in the Catholic Church, and always has. The (so-called) Orthodox churches are in schism. Of course, if you read their apologetical propaganda they will argue the opposite, but it’s a bit like a Southerner trying to rewrite history to claim that it was the North that seceded.

And while it’s true that both sides made political missteps, that should not be taken as saying that the Catholic Church made any theological errors. The theological and ecclesiological errors lie entirely on the side of the (so-called) Orthodox.


#8

[quote="Luvtosew, post:6, topic:277321"]
Just over the change in the Creed?

[/quote]

No, I believe it was a bit more than that, but I would think that the phrase "and the Son" that was added to the Creed by the Latin Church brought much discomfort to the Eastern Churchs.


#9

[quote="MarkThompson, post:7, topic:277321"]
No, the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church subsists in the Catholic Church, and always has.

[/quote]

In other words, the Catholic Church IS the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and by saying this we can determine that we have the fullness of the Faith. But the Eastern Churchs that identify themselves as Orthodox are still true churchs that can be traced all the way back to the Apostles. And as such, there are elements of the true Church within these churchs although they are not completely within the Catholic Church. Kind of a paradox, I know.:ouch:

Also in regards to how the schism happened, I would say that the both sides did commit errors in this regard. Now, I'm not saying theological errors but political errors. Yes, even in religion there are politics of some kind.


#10

No.

There is no doubt that the Orthodox Church is as “Catholic” as it can be without reconciliation with Rome (May God grant that reconciliation comes soon.)

If you accept the Orthodox Church as “the Church” then I think you will find some things that were said about the Bishop of Rome’s role in the Church that are difficult to reconcile with that belief.

IMHO, either the Catholic Church is “the Church” or the Church of Christ has failed.

I believe and pray unificaton will come soon.

I think this is why God has prevented “the Orthodox Church” [at least most of it, (I’m not really sure how you define all of “the Orthodox Church” in the absence of Rome?)] from declaring any of their councils post the split ecumenical. If they had, I think that would have made unification a practical impossibility.

Chuck


#11

[quote="JD27076, post:1, topic:277321"]
This is what I read:
If you are Roman Catholic, your church shared the same rich apostolic and doctrinal heritage as the Orthodox Church for the first thousand years of its history, since during the first millennium they were one and the same Church. Lamentably, in 1054, the Pope of Rome broke away from the other four Apostolic Patriarchates (which include Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem), by tampering with the Original Creed of the Church, and considering himself to be infallible. Thus your church is 1,000 years old.

Is this true?

[/quote]

No.

Of course ask an Eastern Orthodox he will state otherwise.

It is quite a shame a schism this big occurred. I pray everyday in my life for a full communion someday. Imagine both churches in full communion one day. Think about it. We would be even more worldwide.

Here is a map of the distribution of Catholics Worldwide:

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Distribution_of_Catholics.png

Here is a map of the distribution of Orthodox Worldwide:

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Orthodoxy_by_Country.svg

The red parts are oriental orthodox though.

Combine Catholics and Eastern Orthodox population.
All we would need is a few parts of Asia and a bit of Africa and our church would be physically present in all corners of the earth...

Unfortunately, its going to be hard for a unification. But you never know.


#12

I fear that this has already happened, just the other way around. The fact that the Catholic Church has declared 14 post-schism councils to be ecumenical and through the office of the pope of Rome has declared as dogmatic positions that are unacceptable to a great many Orthodox may have made unification a practical impossibility. I pray that this is not really the case, but in reality, I suspect it is.


#13

[quote="RyanBlack, post:12, topic:277321"]
I fear that this has already happened, just the other way around. The fact that the Catholic Church has declared 14 post-schism councils to be ecumenical and through the office of the pope of Rome has declared as dogmatic positions that are unacceptable to a great many Orthodox may have made unification a practical impossibility. I pray that this is not really the case, but in reality, I suspect it is.

[/quote]

Ohh, come on. Don't say that.

Reunion is always possible if we continue to look at the bright side of things. I agree that there may never be a reunion but we mustn't look at it so negative.

Always keep your highest hopes in this case.


#14

[quote="RyanBlack, post:12, topic:277321"]
I fear that this has already happened, just the other way around. The fact that the Catholic Church has declared 14 post-schism councils to be ecumenical and through the office of the pope of Rome has declared as dogmatic positions that are unacceptable to a great many Orthodox may have made unification a practical impossibility. I pray that this is not really the case, but in reality, I suspect it is.

[/quote]

Yep. There is really only one way that reunification is possible.

Chuck


#15

[quote="Jacob50, post:11, topic:277321"]
No.

Of course ask an Eastern Orthodox he will state otherwise.

It is quite a shame a schism this big occurred. I pray everyday in my life for a full communion someday. Imagine both churches in full communion one day. Think about it. We would be even more worldwide.

Here is a map of the distribution of Catholics Worldwide:

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Distribution_of_Catholics.png

Here is a map of the distribution of Orthodox Worldwide:

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Orthodoxy_by_Country.svg

The red parts are oriental orthodox though.

Combine Catholics and Eastern Orthodox population.
All we would need is a few parts of Asia and a bit of Africa and our church would be physically present in all corners of the earth...

Unfortunately, its going to be hard for a unification. But you never know.

[/quote]

Thank you , so Russia is mainly Orthodox I see.


#16

If they bend the knee to Rome?


#17

Practially, yeah, but I’m not sure that’s the the best way to approach our bretheren. :slight_smile:

The Catholic Church will need to do some serious soul searching in terms of what precisely it has taught on any subject that might differ from that taught prior to the split and where that teaching stands in the heierachy of theological truth.

Where it can bend to accomodate reunion the Catholic Church can and should, where it can’t it can’t.

Those items that have been taught “definitively” (whatever they might be) the Orthodox will have to accept for reunion to be possible.

Any other solution and both Church’s will have fallen into error and well that pretty much puts an end to Christianity as a valid religion (at least from my point of view.)

Chuck


#18

Clmowry #16
The Catholic Church will need to do some serious soul searching in terms of what precisely it has taught on any subject that might differ from that taught prior to the split and where that teaching stands in the heierachy of theological truth.

No. Christ’s Catholic Church does not teach any doctrine or dogma that is in error.

The Catholic Church has always been the only Church established by Jesus the Christ, but from the beginning there have been dissenters and heretics.

There is the Latin Rite, and the Eastern Rite of the Catholic Church with the same dogma and doctrine; naturally, all of these are in union with the See of Peter and assent to Papal Supremacy.

With free-will and selfism, St Paul attests: “I know that after my departure…of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them.” [Acts 20:30].

The Orthodox Churches have broken with the See of Peter since 1054, and are individualistic among themselves. Since "legitimacy" means "lawfulness by virtue of being authorized", it is hardly reasonable to assume that the Orthodox Church has the same legitimacy as the Catholic Church in the mind of Christ, who gave His authority to Peter and his successors to teach, sanctify and rule, and whose supreme authority has been shown in the NT, if Peter's authority is not recognised.

It is not only respect but obedience that is required. The third successor of St Peter, Clement, wrote to the Catholics of Corinth in A.D. 95: "If any man should be disobedient unto the words spoken by God through us, let them understand that they will entangle themselves in no slight transgression and danger... Render obedience to the things written by us through the Holy Spirit." (I Clem. ad Cor. 59,1).


#19

[quote="JD27076, post:1, topic:277321"]
This is what I read:
If you are Roman Catholic, your church shared the same rich apostolic and doctrinal heritage as the Orthodox Church for the first thousand years of its history, since during the first millennium they were one and the same Church. Lamentably, in 1054, the Pope of Rome broke away from the other four Apostolic Patriarchates (which include Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem), by tampering with the Original Creed of the Church, and considering himself to be infallible. Thus your church is 1,000 years old.

Is this true?

[/quote]

Peter is the rock on which Jesus founded His Church. Whoever left the See of Peter has left The Church that Jessu founded.


#20

The so-called ancient patriarchates of the Eastern Orthodox Churches--Jerusalem, Constantinople (Turkey?), Antioch, and Ephesus--actually fell into heresy several times in the first 1,000 years of Christianity. They fell into Arianism, Nestorianism, Monophysitism, Monothelitism, Iconoclasm, etc, and were ushered back to the Orthodox faith through the help of the Ecumenical Councils. As a matter of fact, the entire Eastern Church became monophysite for many years, until Pope St. Leo the Great took action and with the help of the Emperor, called on the Council of Chalcedon.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.