East and West: the long division and the events of 1054

Program / Course 11: Church, Sacraments, and Authority / Lesson 8.2

What you will learn

• Describe the long-term causes of the estrangement between the Greek East and the Latin West.
• Explain what happened in 1054 and why historians call it a symbolic moment.
• State the main issues: papal authority, the filioque, unleavened bread and other practices.
• Describe the later steps, including 1204, the Council of Florence, 1965 and recent contacts.

The big idea

The separation between the Eastern and Western churches was not a single event. It was a slow estrangement over several centuries, with differences of language, culture, politics and practice, and disagreements over papal authority and the filioque clause in the creed. In 1054 a papal legate and the patriarch of Constantinople excommunicated each other, and this date has become a symbol. Historians generally say that the rupture became settled only after the Fourth Crusade of 1204. In 1965 Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras lifted the mutual excommunications, though full communion has not been restored.

Key terms

Filioque

Latin for and from the Son. A phrase added in the West to the Nicene Creed, so that it says the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.

Procession

The coming forth of the Holy Spirit from the Father (and, in Western teaching, also from the Son).

Azymes

Unleavened bread, used for the Eucharist in the Latin church. The Greeks used leavened bread.

Legate

A representative sent by the pope with authority to act for him.

Anathema

A formal condemnation or excommunication by the church.

Patriarch of Constantinople

The senior bishop of the Eastern church, whose see was the capital of the Byzantine Empire.

Uniate (disputed term)

A name, now often considered offensive, for Eastern churches in communion with Rome. The preferred term is Eastern Catholic churches.

Background

In the first centuries the Greek-speaking East and Latin-speaking West shared one church, though they often differed in style. From the fifth century the Roman Empire in the West collapsed, and the two halves drifted apart. Fewer people could read both languages. The Eastern emperor and the western kings and popes had different interests. The papacy turned to the Franks for protection, and in 800 Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne emperor, which the Byzantines saw as a challenge to their own emperor.

There were brief breaks before 1054. The Acacian schism (484 to 519) separated Rome and Constantinople for thirty-five years. The Photian affair in the 860s involved a dispute over the patriarch Photius, the mission to Bulgaria and the filioque. These episodes ended with reconciliation, and the churches remained in contact. Many Eastern and Western Christians in the eleventh century did not know that a permanent schism had begun.

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: The filioque

The Nicene Creed of 381 says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. In Spain in the sixth century, churches began adding and from the Son to oppose Arianism, and the addition spread in the West. Rome adopted it in the creed in 1014. Eastern Christians objected for two reasons. The first was procedure: the creed belonged to the whole church and could not be changed by one part without an ecumenical council. The second was theology: they held that the Father alone is the source of the Godhead, and the Son’s role in the Spirit’s procession compromises this.

Western theologians reply that the Latin fathers, such as Augustine, taught the Spirit’s procession from the Father and the Son, that the phrase protects the Son’s divinity, and that Eastern fathers also spoke of the Spirit being sent through the Son. Catholic teaching, as in the 1995 Vatican clarification, says that the Greek and Latin expressions can be understood as the same faith in different words. Many Orthodox deny this. Some Western churches, such as some Anglican and Protestant bodies in dialogue, have considered dropping the phrase from the creed.

Step 2: Papal authority and other differences

The greatest issue was the authority of the bishop of Rome. Rome, in the eleventh century under reforming popes, claimed universal jurisdiction. Constantinople accepted a primacy of honor, and not the right of the pope to command the East. A second area of difference was liturgical and disciplinary practices: the West used unleavened bread, the East leavened; Western priests were required to be celibate, while Eastern priests could be married; the West used a shorter fast in some respects; the East used a different manner of baptizing and anointing. These were not seen at first as dividing issues, but became symbols of difference when other tensions grew.

There were also issues of jurisdiction in southern Italy, where Norman conquests brought Latin bishops into areas which had been Greek-speaking. In 1053 Cerularius closed Latin churches in Constantinople, and the pope responded.

Step 3: The events of 1054

In 1054 Pope Leo IX sent a delegation to Constantinople, led by Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida, to seek help against the Normans and to settle the dispute with Patriarch Michael Cerularius. The meeting went badly. Humbert was a firm man and Cerularius was proud, and neither gave way. Leo IX had died in April, so the legates’ authority was in doubt. On 16 July 1054, Humbert placed a bull of excommunication on the altar of Hagia Sophia, aimed at Cerularius and his supporters. Cerularius then held a synod that excommunicated the legates.

The documents named particular persons and did not excommunicate the whole Western or Eastern church. The emperor and many Eastern bishops did not at first treat it as a schism, and relations continued for some time. Historians generally conclude that 1054 was a symbolic moment, important because later generations treated it as a boundary, within a longer process.

Step 4: From 1054 to 1204 and beyond

The Crusades began in 1095 at the request of the Byzantine emperor for help, and they increased mistrust. In 1204 the Fourth Crusade, diverted from its goal, sacked Constantinople, installed a Latin emperor and a Latin patriarch, and carried off many relics. Many Orthodox consider this the event that made the division permanent. Pope Innocent III condemned the violence but accepted the result for a time.

The Councils of Lyons (1274) and Ferrara-Florence (1438 to 1439) produced agreements on union, as the Byzantines sought Western aid against the Turks. Both were rejected by Eastern clergy and people, and ended with the fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans in 1453. Some Eastern churches did later enter communion with Rome, becoming the Eastern Catholic churches, which keep their own liturgies and married clergy. Orthodox Christians often regard these as a source of grievance.

Step 5: The twentieth century and today

On 7 December 1965, the last day of the Second Vatican Council, Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople issued a common declaration expressing regret for the words and acts of 1054, and removing from memory and from the midst of the church the sentences of excommunication. The declaration did not restore communion, but it changed the tone of relations. In 2001 Pope John Paul II asked forgiveness for the sins of Catholics against the Orthodox, including 1204. Popes and patriarchs have since met many times, and a joint commission for theological dialogue has worked since 1980. The questions of papal primacy and synodality are the main unresolved issues.

1. What differences, other than doctrine, separated East and West before 1054?
2. What exactly was excommunicated in 1054, and by whom?
3. Why do Orthodox Christians object to the filioque, and how do Catholics reply?
4. Why do many Orthodox see 1204 as more decisive than 1054?
5. Why did the unions of Lyons and Florence fail?
6. What did the declaration of 1965 do, and what did it leave undone?

Examples

Different perspectives

Catholic

Catholics regard the division as a wound in the body of Christ and hold that the primacy of the successor of Peter was given by Christ. They acknowledge that Western Christians committed offenses, such as the sack of Constantinople. They recognize the Orthodox churches as true churches with valid sacraments and apostolic succession, and seek communion.

Orthodox

The Orthodox hold that the West departed from the faith of the early church by adding to the creed and by its claims for the pope, and that the Orthodox Church kept the faith unchanged. Many see the Crusades and Western domination as great wrongs. They seek unity on the basis of the faith of the first millennium, and differ on how to engage with Rome.

Protestant

Protestants, who separated from Rome later, generally accept the filioque as expressing biblical teaching (John 15:26 and John 16:7 are cited), though some now question whether it should be in the creed. They reject papal primacy as claimed in the Catholic definition. Many have taken interest in Eastern Christianity in recent decades.

Scholarly view

Historians agree that the split was gradual and that the events of 1054 were less decisive than later tradition says. They note that political, cultural and linguistic factors mattered, and that disputes about authority were at the heart of it. Historians of the East and West emphasize different events, and debates continue.

Why it matters

The East-West division affects hundreds of millions of Christians and remains a major unresolved problem in the church. Knowing the long process behind the date 1054 prevents oversimplified accounts that blame one side or a single event. It also helps a student understand why present dialogues focus on authority and the creed.

Common misunderstandings

Knowledge check

Think it through

1. Why do the dates people remember often differ from the dates that historians stress?
2. What would it take for the two churches to reach agreement on the papacy?
3. How should a church treat acts of violence committed by its members in the past?
4. What does the story suggest about how a split comes to be accepted?

Independent assignment

A timeline of the long division

In your notebook, make a timeline from 451 to 2001, with at least twelve entries including the coronation of Charlemagne, the Photian affair, the adoption of the filioque in Rome, 1054, the First Crusade, 1204, Lyons, Florence, 1453, 1965 and 2001. Add one sentence for each. Then write 300 to 400 words on how a Catholic and an Orthodox historian might tell the story differently. Keep the work in your notebook.

Further study

• Timothy (Kallistos) Ware, The Orthodox Church Read the chapter on the schism between East and West.
• Council of Nicaea (325) and Council of Constantinople (381), The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed Compare the Greek and Latin forms of the clause on the Holy Spirit.
• Augustine of Hippo, On the Trinity Augustine’s teaching on the Spirit, which Western writers cite.
• First Vatican Council, Decrees of the First Vatican Council (including Pastor Aeternus on papal primacy and infallibility) The definition on the papacy that Orthodox writers most often challenge.
• Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity A general history that covers the division.
• John 15:26 The Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father.
• John 16:7 I will send him to you.
• John 17:21 That they all may be one.