The Great Schism of 1054 In a time of developing religions, disagreements were bound to occur. One argument resulted in the divergence of two different branches of Christianity. Formally known as The Great Schism or The East-West Schism, rising tensions and differing ideologies led to the development of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. Many factors led to the Schism, including opposing cultural, political, social, and theological viewpoints. Ranging from the 9th to the 15th century, the Schism was not a clean break, but was a slow course of disaffection between the opposing parties. The Schism was a major catalyst for many events in the 11th century. The Great Schism of 1054 was a multi-faceted, extended dispute that ultimately affected the
…show more content…
While a detailed examination of the theological differences between what are today the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches is beyond the scope of this concise exposition, this essay will feature a few examples. Culturally, the Eastern and Western churches were radically diverse. The two regional churches spoke different languages, resulting in lack of communication between the churches. Furthermore, the Eastern church focused on philosophy, as opposed to the law-oriented Western church. The differing theological genius’ led to two wildly dissimilar versions of one dogma. This doctrine was in reference to the origins of the Holy Spirit. The Roman Church incorporated the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Son, unbeknownst to the Greek church who disagreed with this notion. The view of the Roman Church was known as the Filioque. Political views of the Roman and Byzantine branches of the Christian Church also varied. The Latin branch recognized Charlemagne as Holy Roman Emperor when he was crowned by Pope Leo III in 800. However, the Byzantine Greeks refused to recognize Charlemagne as emperor. Social statutes generated additional rifts in the Eastern and Western branches of the church. For example, the Romans insisted on clerical celibacy, an edict unpopular with the Greeks. The Latin and Greek
While a detailed examination of the theological differences between what are today the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches is beyond the scope of this concise exposition, this essay will feature a few examples. Culturally, the Eastern and Western churches were radically diverse. The two regional churches spoke different languages, resulting in lack of communication between the churches. Furthermore, the Eastern church focused on philosophy, as opposed to the law-oriented Western church. The differing theological genius’ led to two wildly dissimilar versions of one dogma. This doctrine was in reference to the origins of the Holy Spirit. The Roman Church incorporated the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Son, unbeknownst to the Greek church who disagreed with this notion. The view of the Roman Church was known as the Filioque. Political views of the Roman and Byzantine branches of the Christian Church also varied. The Latin branch recognized Charlemagne as Holy Roman Emperor when he was crowned by Pope Leo III in 800. However, the Byzantine Greeks refused to recognize Charlemagne as emperor. Social statutes generated additional rifts in the Eastern and Western branches of the church. For example, the Romans insisted on clerical celibacy, an edict unpopular with the Greeks. The Latin and Greek