There is much we can learn from the Great Schism of 1054. “The
church was split along doctrinal, theological, linguistic, political and
geographical lines” (Lumen). The Roman empire was in
decline; there were invasions by the barbarians, from Islam and from the
Scandinavians. By 410, Rome was conquered, and its emperor deposed. The period
resulting was characterized by Tony Lane (88) as “a period of turmoil and
anarchy, with the near collapse of civilization”. By 800, Charlemagne (King of
the Franks) was declared the new Roman emperor. This move was strategic for the
Christian church. As with all events, there are opportunities and challenges,
depending on if you see the glass as half empty or half full.
As it relates to doctrine, “the history, philosophy,
personalities and politics that form medieval theology came together in a way
that reveals the best of a long running human struggle to understand the
divine” (Sheppard, 21). During this time however, getting creative with your theology
could come at great cost. It was common place to for theologians to feel the
polemic wrath of the other side. It was difficult to “group medieval
theologians into one school of thought as there was such variety of views. They
were passionate in the quest to find clarity in the Christian faith” (Sheppard,
22). We would do well to learn from these men to continue the search for truth
as many “faced serious consequences for straying outside the bounds of commonly
accepted church teaching” (Sheppard, 22). If we are to grow in our
understanding of the divine, we must be open to debate and considerations of
others’ views without compromising our core doctrinal beliefs. We are the beneficiaries
of centuries old theological debates. One core theological position that was
the source of contention was the fathers’ understanding of the Trinity,
otherwise known as Filioque. “This single Latin word holds the dubious honor of
being one of the main factors responsible for the 1054 Schism (Nichols). In the
West, theologians believed the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father and the
Son (John 16:7). The Eastern church, on the other hand emphasize the “Threeness
of the Trinity or the individual Persons” (Nichols).
Another point of contention was the influence of the Papacy.
The Papacy has long been a deciding factor on matters of “first order regarding
theology, church order, and the church’s place in the world” (Noll, 103). By
the time of Leo the Great (440 – 61), the Roman See advocated that the bishop
of Rome be the successor of the Apostle Peter. This was an attempt to bolster
Roman ecclesiastical supremacy. This the Roman bishops contended was based on
Matthew 16:18. This would not go down with contention between the sees of
Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, and Jerusalem
Then there was the influence of Iconoclasm. This further “widened
the growing divergence and tensions between the East and the West” (Lumen),
with the West favoring religious images or icons while the East opposed. By
1053, Cerularius “ordered the close of all Latin churches in Constantinople, in
response to the Greek churches in southern Italy having been forced to either
close or conform to Latin practices” (Lumen). By mid-ninth century “Nicholas 1
would exert papal authority against the East and against secular rulers who succeeded
Charlemagne” (Noll, 108). Also during this time, the was a rise in the
influence of Monasticism to fill the gap left by the church at large, ushering
the period of debates involving faith and philosophy.
We also cannot forget the rise of Islam and the impact of
Muslim expansion in the region. Noll (112) states that “centuries of
in-fighting among Christians combined with strife over doctrine, with wearisome
contests for power further undermined the internal strength of the Christian
community”.
These centuries long struggles of church/state matters
eventually led to the “gradual separation between east (now Eastern Orthodox
Church) and west (now Roman Catholic Church). If we’ve learned anything it
should be that in the long run, it is not beneficial for the church to become embroiled
in endless infighting as it truly diminishes her role as a witness of Christ.
The Apostle Paul encouraged the Thessalonians and the church at large “You are
witnesses, and so is God, how devoutly and uprightly and blamelessly we behaved
toward you believers” (1 Thess. 2:10). This call is still relevant for the
church today. How can we seriously win others to Christ, when the Church of
Christ is embroiled in such unflattering in-fighting? To what benefit is seeking
supremacy over each other?
By 1054 the influence of the Church was declining. It was
deeply tied to the state, opening the door to “dignitaries who were exalted to
high ecclesiastical positions who sometimes acted like devils; whose behavior
was replicated by the common believers” (Noll, 117). This approach was
unbiblical, and we ought not practice. “At the heart of the church-state
relationship was harmonious cooperation” (Noll, 117), but the long-term results
yielded much harm. The church should work very closely with the state, ensuring
a voice on policy matters, especially matters of morality, but we should not be
so closely intertwined that we (the church) can no longer be a true reflection
of Christ.
References:
Noll, Mark. “Turning Points”. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Publishing Group (2012)
Lane, Tony. “A Concise History of Christian Thought”. Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group (2006).
Nichols, Steven . Ligonier Ministries. “The Great Schism of
1054”. Accessed April 12, 2018 https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/great-schism/
Lumen Learning. “The Great Schism of 1054”. Accessed April
12, 2018. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldhistory/chapter/the-great-schism-of-1054/
Written by Pastor Kevin A. Hall April 12, 2018
GoogleImages.
No comments:
Post a Comment