Catholic Understanding of Schism - Literature review Example

Catholic Understanding of Schism The major division of the Catholic Church transpired in 1054, when it split into theEastern (Orthodox) and Western (Roman Catholic) churches. Referred to as “schism”, theologians regard the event as a vital part of the Catholic Church’s history. Needham (2002) infers that the reigning pope’s decision to exercise his mandate by altering a creed without regarding others’ opinion on the issue instigated the division. Immediately, there was an outcry from those displeased by the pope’s decision. In order to understand better the contrasts in doctrine, religious practices, and political ideologies, which are considered the root causes of Schism, one must first understand the Catholic’s historical context prior to the split. Historical context Fundamental to the Catholic Church are the various sacraments believed to bestow their salvific abilities through graces, which can only be effected by properly ordained clergy/priesthood (Grudem 2003). A hierarchy exists within the Catholic Church’s priesthood, which dictates the roles played by those ordained. The Pope represents the highest authority, and is believed to be the true representative of Christ on earth, “The Vicar of Christ”. The pope was originally known as the “Vicar of Peter”, which meant that he stood in the place of Peter as his representative. This was significant for it was believed that Jesus Christ himself had made Peter the head of the church while he was still physically present on earth (Matt.16:18). In light of this, Catholics believe that the pope possesses direct blessing and authority from Jesus Christ himself, just as Peter did, which in turn gives them the mandate to head the Church. Pope Innocent was the first pope to refer to himself as the Vicar of Christ, as he declared that the popes were: “…the successor of Peter the prince of the apostles, but we are not his vicar, nor the vicar of any man or any apostle but the vicar of Jesus Christ Himself” (Needham 2000). The doctrine of the church has its roots in the earliest Christian era in which members of the church were known as the people of God, who he had chosen for himself. However, the Church was confronted by many heresies, and so in an effort to consolidate itself and to remain true as the people of God called to a life of holiness the church developed a structure. The result was that it became an external institute ruled by the successors to the apostles. The local churches were not conceived as separate units but as part of a whole, the universal church. A church was regarded as a true church as long as it remained loyal and subject to the Catholic Church as a whole. Unfortunately, politics, nobles, nations and wars also played a role in the church and this saw too many splits called schisms. According to the Catholic Church, the splinter churches ceased to be a true church as soon as it detached itself form the true church. Doctrine Schism resulted mainly from the influence of the teachings of the church fathers that differed in theological approach. The Eastern Church favored the Cappadocia fathers’ understanding of the Trinity. The Eastern Church understood the doctrine of the trinity by beginning with the persons of the Trinity. They also favored “God the Father” as the fountain of the deity and as the cause of their divine essence. In contrast, the western church began with the nature of God with the ones of the Trinity lying in their shared essence. This was in line with St Augustine of Hippo’s theology. What this boiled down to was that the western church insisted on an equality of the Son (Jesus) and the Father in the Trinity. The Eastern Church argued that this would undermine the full deity of the Holy Spirit if the Father or the Son were a source of the Holy Spirit. This led them to argue over clause in the Nicene Creed, which was meant to serve both churches equally. Secondly, the Eastern Church did not teach the doctrine of purgatory, which was central to the western church. The western church held that some aspects of sin could be removed through penance and indulgences and that the pope had the power release souls from purgatory. The east denied the existence of purgatory, the punishment of the righteous, the treasury of merits (accumulation of good deeds), and indulgences. The eastern church believed that all the church could do for those who had died and fallen short of God’s standards was to pray for them but that ultimately only Christ had power over their eternity. Issues that touched on the eternal condition of the soul were very central to life in the middle ages. People were more concerned about their state in the afterlife more than in this world as they reasoned that after all eternity was forever and life on earth was temporary and passing with. Religious Practice Western priests could not marry whereas the eastern ones could marry. Celibacy was a prerequisite for priesthood in the west and to keep one’s ordination, celibacy had to be maintained at all costs. Conversely, the eastern priests usually married before taking the vows of priesthood, which the Western front perceived as an abomination. According to the latter, such an act mandated the loss of one’s priesthood. There was also the disagreement in the method used in baptism, which created more tension between the two divides of Christendom. The western church tolerated different practices: ”… three-fold emersion, single immersion, and affussion….” (Needham 2000). The position adapted by the church had to be the correct one for much was at stake for the believer. The priest had to have the right qualifications or else the church ordinances would be invalid and the method had to be right or else they would also be rendered invalid. It is for these reasons that the western and eastern churches took a hard stance with their positions. For example, Gregory the Great is credited with the development of the doctrine of purgatory, as a material fire. This teaching along with the teaching of the impartation of graces from the ordinances of the church greatly influenced the religious practices of the western church (Berkhorf 2002). The Roman Catholic Church puts a lot of emphasis on good works in an attempt to attain greater sanctification and reduce the amount of time a soul may have to spend in purgatory. Political Differences Both fronts began drifting apart after the fall of the Roman Empire. The empire was a made up of conquered nations who spoke different languages and had diverse cultures with little to no consideration for each other. The fall of the Roman Empire revived nationalism among people from different nations. The church by that time had a lot of power even in politics and vice-versa. The East was made up of the Germanic and the Norse Kingdoms who had converted from paganism and Aryanism. The Eastern Church came from the Byzantine kingdom composed of people who professed a different religion. Differences in religions meant differences in politics for the gods of a nation were believed to support that kingdom. This understanding influenced their theological beliefs and divided them along political affiliations. There was political rivalry between Rome and Constantinople, which also played out in church affairs. The Roman popes/bishops claimed superiority and authority over the universal church, which did not go down well with the Eastern Church. The latter claimed that the church did not have a visible human head. The Eastern Church wanted the church to be governed by the five centers of Christianity: Rome, Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria on an equal standing. These disagreements over the power and authority of the church were mainly fueled by political leaders who supported their favorites by contributing recourses and spreading propaganda. The church benefited from the state and vice-versa, as each strived to give legitimacy to their culturally conscious church for their mutual benefit. The political class needed the legitimacy. Everybody wanted to be identified with the kingdom of God and since the visible Catholic/Universal church was identified with the kingdom of God, it had immense power. This understanding was taught by Augustine a prominent theologian and furthered by forged documents that circulated in the ninth century (Ludwig 1952). Conclusion In conclusion, the church’s split in 1054 resulted from contrasting perspectives in political ideologies, theological doctrines and religious practices. The reason for the political splitting was brought about by the supremacy battles of kingdoms that were once part of the Roman Kingdom after its fall in 410 BC. There were cultural, language and political differences that had never been bridged and were only awaiting an opportunity to manifest. This affected people’s real life including their other non-religious practices. Theological differences arose from allegiances to fathers in the faith who had different understandings of theology. People from the different regions supported priests from their own region with similar culture, language and political affiliations. The religious practices emanated from the teaching of the church priests and this affected the practice and understanding of theology. Since people only accepted their own then it meant that the religious practices became regionalized by the influence of the church fathers (Richard 1980). Works Cited Berkhorf, Louis. The History of Christian Doctrines. Pennsylvania: The Banner Of Truth trust, 2002. Grudem, Wayne. Systematic theology. Leicester,England: Intervarsity press, 2003. Ludwig, Ott. Fundamentals of Catholic dogma. St Lousis: Herder, 1952. Needham, N.R. 2000 Years of Christs Power. Darlington,England: Grace publications, 2002. —. 2000 Years of Christs Power: The Middle Ages. Darlington England: Grace Publications, 2000. Richard, McBrein. Catholicism. Minneapolis: Winston Press, 1980. Read More