Orthodox and catholics in the seventeenth century: schism or intercommunion?

K. T. Ware

doi:10.1017/S042420840000588X

Orthodox and catholics in the seventeenth century: schism or intercommunion?

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 March 2016

K. T. Ware

Show author details

K. T. Ware*: Affiliation:
University of Oxford

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

For use on the first Sunday in Lent, the service books of the Greek Orthodox Church include a special office known as ‘The Synodikon of Orthodoxy’, which contains no less than sixty anathemas against different heresies and heresiarchs. Yet in this comprehensive denunciation there is one unexpected omission: no reference is made to the errors of the Latins, no allusion to the Filioque or the papal claims, even though more than a third of the anathemas date from the eleventh to the fourteenth centuries, a time when doctrinal disagreements between East and West had emerged clearly into the open. This omission of the Latins is an indication of the curious imprecision which prevails in the relations between Orthodoxy and Rome. It is altogether obvious that an estrangement has long existed between the Greek East and the Latin West. What is much less obvious is the precise point at which this estrangement evolved into a definitive schism, into a clear and final breach in sacramental communion. The division between the two halves of Christendom did not occur as a single event, accomplished once and for all at a specific moment in history: it was, on the contrary, a gradual, fluctuating, and disjointed process, stretching over a remarkably extended period.

Type: Research Article
Information: Studies in Church History , Volume 9: Schism, Heresy and Religious Protest , 1972 , pp. 259 - 276

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S042420840000588X [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page no 259 note 1} For the text of the Synodikon, see Τριῴδιον κατανυκτικόν (Apostoliki Diakonia, Athens 1960) pp 144-51. Compare also Gouillard, J., ‘Le Synodikon de l’Orthodoxie: édition et commentaire ‘, Travaux et Mémoires, II (Centre de recherche d’histoire et civilisation byzantines, Paris 1967) pp 1-316Google Scholar.

^{page no 259 note 2} I take this phrase from Fr Gervase Mathew, OP: see The Eastern Churches Quarterly, VI, 5 (Ramsgate 1946) p 227 Google Scholar, and compare Every, [G.], [SSM,] Misunderstandings [between East and West], Ecumenical Studies in History , No 4 (London 1965) p 9 Google Scholar.

^{page no 260 note 1} For the text, see PG 102 (1860) cols 721-41.

^{page no 260 note 2} See PL 143 (1853) cols 1004B; PG 120 (1864) col 748B.

^{page no 261 note 1} Greek text in Holtzmann, W., ‘ Die Unionsverhandlungen zwischen Kaiser Alexios I. und Papst Urban II. im Jahre 1089’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, XXVIII (Leipzig 1928) p 60 Google Scholar: cited by Every, G., The Byzantine Patriarchate 451-1204 (2 ed, London 1962) p 180 Google Scholar.

^{page no 261 note 2} The Eastern Schism (Oxford 1955) p 151 Google Scholar.

^{page no 261 note 3} Text in Gill, J., The Council of Florence (Cambridge 1959) p 412 Google Scholar.

^{page no 262 note 1} The text of this service is given in Karmiris, I. N., Тὰ Δογματικά καὶ Συμβολικὰ Μνημεῑα τῆς Όρθοδόξου Καθολικῆς Έκκλησίαϛ, II (Athens 1953) pp 987-9Google Scholar. Orthodox writers occasionally describe the synod of 1484 as ‘ ecumenical ‘, see, for example, Rallis, G. A. and Potlis, M., Σύνταγμα τῶν θεlων καἰ ἱερῶν κανόνων, V (Athens 1855) P 143 Google Scholar, but it should more correctly be styled ‘ local ‘, compare Trembelas, P. N., Δογματική τῆς Όρθοδόξου Καθολικῆς Έκκλησἰας, I (Athens 1959) p 136 n 53 Google Scholar.

^{page no 263 note 1} De Ecclesiae Occidentalis atque Orientalis Perpetua Consensione (Cologne 1648; photo graphie reprint with new introduction by Ware, K. T., Gregg International Press, Westmead 1970) cols 979-80, 1059Google Scholar.

^{page no 263 note 2} A vast inventory of acts of communicatio in sacris during the seventeenth century is supplied by Grigoriou-Garo, [P.], Σχέσεις [καθολικῶς καl ὀρθοδόξων] (Athens 1958)Google Scholar. The main evidence is briefly summarised by [Ware, Timothy (K. T.)], Eustratios Argenti:[A Study of the Greek Church under Turkish Rule] (Oxford 1964) pp 17–23, 36-7Google Scholar.

^{page no 263 note 3} See Sarou, A. K., Пϵρl μεικτών ναῶν όρθοδόξων καί καθολικῶν έν Xίῳ, in Έπετηρἱς Έταιρεἰας ΒЗαντινῶν Σπουδῶν, XIX (Athens 1949) PP 194–208 Google Scholar; Grigoriou-Garo, Σχέσεις, pp 25-6, 34-41, 57.

^{page no 264 note 1} For contemporary accounts of these missions, see [François] Richard,, [SJ,] Relation [de ce qui s’est passé de plus remarquable à Sant-Erini isle de l’Archipel, depuis l’établissement des Pères de la Compagnie de Iésus en icelle] (Paris 1657)Google Scholar; the anonymous report dating from 1643 and perhaps by FrMathieu, Hardy SJ, entitled ‘Relation [de ce qui s’est passé en la résidence des Pères de la Compagnie de Jésus establie à Naxie le 26 Septembre de l’année 1627’], ed Laurent, [V.], [Echos d’Orient,] XXXIII (Paris 1934) pp 218-26, 354-75, and XXXIV (1935) pp 97-105, 179-204, 350-67, 473-81Google Scholar; Carayon, [A.] [SJ], Relations inédites [des Missions de la Compagnie de Jésus à Constantinople et dans le Levant au XVII^e siècle] (Paris 1864)Google Scholar. Compare Fouqueray, [H.] [SJ], Histoire [de la Compagnie de Jésus en France des origines à la suppression (1528-1762),] 5 vols (Paris 1910-25) especially III, pp 200-15, 606-35; IV, pp 315-62; V, pp 341-89Google Scholar. There is much valuable material in the series of articles by Laurent, V., ‘ L’âge d’or des Missions latines dans le Levant (XVII^e–XVIII_e siècle)’, L’Unité de l’Eglise (Paris) issues for 1934-5Google Scholar. For the work of the Capuchins in the Near East (who were usually more cautious and reserved than the Jesuits in the matter of communicatio in sacris), see FrHilaire, de Barenton FMC, La France catholique en Orient durant les trois derniers siècles (Paris 1902)Google Scholar.

^{page no 264 note 2} See the articles by de Vries, [W.] SJ, ‘Das Problem der “communicatio in sacris cum dissidentibus” im Nahen Osten zur Zeit der Union (17. und 18. Jahrhundert)’, Ost kirchliche Studien, VI (Würtzburg 1957) pp 81-106Google Scholar; ‘Eine Denkschrift zur Frage der “communicatio in sacris cum dissidentibus” aus dem Jahre 1721’, Ostkirchliche Studien, VII (1958) pp 253-66; ‘“Communicatio in sacris”: An Historical Study [of the Problem of Liturgical Services in Common with Eastern Christians Separated from Rome’], Concilium IV, 1 (London 1965) pp 11-22.

^{page no 266 note 1} Fouqueray, , Histoire, IV, pp 344-5Google Scholar.

^{page no 266 note 2} ‘ Briève relation [de l’établissement des Pères de la Compagnie de Jésus en la ville de Smyrně...’], in Carayon, Relations inédites, pp 174-5: compare Fouqueray, Histoire, V, p 367.

^{page no 266 note 3} ‘Relation’, ed Laurent, XXXIV, pp 350-1, 353-4: compare the letter of Fr Mathieu Hardy in Carayon, Relations inédites, p 116.

^{page no 266 note 4} Richard, Relation, p 127.

^{page no 267 note 1} Grigoriou-Garo, Σχέσεις, p 83.

^{page no 267 note 2} ‘Relation’, ed Laurent, XXXIV, pp 359-60.

^{page no 267 note 3} ‘Relation’, ed Laurent, XXXIV, p 357.

^{page no 267 note 4} ‘Briève relation’, pp 172-3; Fr F.Richard, SJ, in Grigoriou-Garo, Σχέσεις, p 83; Laurent, , ‘L’âge d’or’, L’Unité de l’Eglise, No 72 (1935), p 477 Google Scholar.

^{page no 267 note 5} Grigoriou-Garo, Σχέσεις, p 34.

^{page no 267 note 6} For examples, see Richard, Relation, p 135; Grigoriou-Garo, Σχέσεις, p 97.

^{page no 268 note 1} Allatius, De.. .Perpetua Consensione, cols 1659-60; compare Salaville, S., Studia Orientalia Liturgico-Theologica (Rome 1940) pp 54–61 Google Scholar.

^{page no 268 note 2} Grigoriou-Garo, Σχέσεις p 107.

^{page no 268 note 3} Hilaire de Barenton, La France catholique, p 175. For other examples, see Richard, Relation, pp 309-12; ‘Relation’, ed Laurent, , XXXIV, pp 198-9Google Scholar; Grigoriou-Garo, Σχέσεις, pp 83, 112, 116.

^{page no 268 note 4} Fouqueray, , Histoire, III, p 618 Google Scholar.

^{page no 268 note 5} Hofmann, G., ‘Athos e Roma’, Orientalia Christiana, XIX (Rome 1925) pp 5–6, 29-31Google Scholar; Grigoriou-Garo, Σχέσεις, pp 163-74.

^{page no 269 note 1} Fouqueray, , Histoire, V, pp 382-3Google Scholar.

^{page no 269 note 2} Hofmann, G., ‘Byzantinische Bischöfe und Rom’, Orientalia Christiana, LXX (Rome 1931) PP 19–20.Google Scholar

^{page no 269 note 3} Besson, J. SJ, La Syrie sainte (Paris 1660), p 11 Google Scholar.

^{page no 270 note 1} Mansi, XXVII, cols 1192D-93A. For the importance of this decree for the question of communicatio in sacris, see de Vries, ‘“Communicatio in sacris”: An Historical Study’, p 13.

^{page no 270 note 2} Quaestiones, p 207.

^{page no 270 note 3} Quaestiones, p 138.

^{page no 270 note 4} Quaestiones, pp 139, 465.

^{page no 271 note 1} Quaestiones, p 145.

^{page no 271 note 2} Quaestiones, p 152. But Verricelli admits that others hold an opposite view on this point, and he only defends his opinion as probabilis.

^{page no 271 note 3} Quaestiones, p 753.

^{page no 271 note 4} Quaestiones, pp 492-3. Compare the truly Machiavellian schemes of Thomas à Jesu, De Procuranda Salute Omnium Gentium (Antwerp 1613) pp 293-7.

^{page no 271 note 5} Quaestiones, p 148.

^{page no 271 note 6} Verricelli in fact inclines to the view that the Greeks in general are to be considered schismatics rather than heretics; individual Greeks may be tainted with heresy, but this cannot be affirmed of the Greek nation as a whole (Quaestiones, pp 634-5).

^{page no 271 note 7} First edition: Paris 1655.

^{page no 272 note 1} Commentarius, p 3. On the views of seventeenth-century historians concerning the date of the schism, see the valuable discussion in Every, Misunderstandings, pp 15-24.

^{page no 272 note 2} This particular statement comes, not from De.. .Perpetua Consensione, but from another book on the same subject, in which Allatius collaborated with Bartold, Nihusius and Abraham, Ecchelensis: Concordia Nationum Christianarum.. .in Fidei Catholicae Dogmati-bus (Mainz 1655) p 121 Google Scholar

^{page no 273 note 1} For the views of Allatius on Hesychasm, see his De Symeonorum Scriptis Diatriba (Paris 1664), pp 151-79Google Scholar; De...Perpetua Consensione, cols 802-40.

^{page no 273 note 2} Ioannes Henricus Hottingerus Fraudis, & Imposturae Manifestae Convictus (Rome 1661) pp 6-7. Compare De...Perpetua Consensione, col 711.

^{page no 273 note 3} Praenotiones Mystagogicae ex Jure Canonico (Padua 1697) p iv.

^{page no 273 note 4} Manuale Missionariorum Orientalium, 2 vols (Venice 1726) 1, p 83: compare Borgo- manero, G., ‘Gli apologisti della dottrina cattolica contro i Greci nel secolo XVII. Il P. Carlo Francesco da Breno’, Bessarione, 3rd series, VIII (Rome 1910-11) p 292 Google Scholar.

^{page no 274 note 1} See Ware, Eustratios Argenti, pp 31-2.

^{page no 274 note 2} See de Vries, ‘“Communicatio in sacris”: An Historical Study’, pp 18-19.

^{page no 274 note 3} See Ware, Eustratios Argenti, pp 28-30, for further details and bibliography.

^{page no 275 note 1} See Ware, Eustrmios Argenti, pp 65-78. The 1755 measure did not apply to Russia, which ceased to rebaptise Latin converts from 1666-7 onwards. Since the end of the last century, the 1755 decision has fallen largely into disuse, but it has never been formally revoked and is still occasionally applied.

^{page no 275 note 2} Memorandum to cardinal von Reisach, in Battandier, A., Le Cardinal Jean-Baptiste Pitra (Paris 1893) pp 435-9Google Scholar. This reference was kindly supplied to me by Br George Every.

^{page no 275 note 3} See Codex Juris Canonici Pii X Pontificis Maximi iussu digestus (Rome 1949) §882; Journet, C., The Church of the Word Incarnate, I (London 1955) p 508 Google Scholar.

Article contents

Orthodox and catholics in the seventeenth century: schism or intercommunion?

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests