Pentecost: and the fire spread outwards, to the nations of the earth, as Our Lord commanded. The Holy Orthodox understanding is that originally there were the Churches of Jerusalem, Constantinople, Antioch, Rome and Alexandria, each founded by one of the Apostles. St. Peter founded the Patriarchate of Jerusalem and then Rome. He was martyred in Rome. Other Patriarchates followed, spreading the Gospel into Greece, Russia, and what is now the Middle East. It is very important to understand here that the Holy Orthodox teaching is that the Churches were self-governing, in the sense that they were not subject to any other Church, only to the Seven Ecumenical Councils (in the first centuries of Christianity). This is important in order to understand Holy Orthodoxy today: there remains a kind of independence between the Patriarchates, and so it is a serious question as to just who speaks for the whole. There does not seem to be a doctrine of “First Among Equals” as we have well defined in the Roman Catholic Tradition. If a theory may be posited, it may be that the Holy Orthodox Tradition, in the teachings and lives of the Holy Saints and the teaching preserved in the liturgy and the Holy Scriptures IS the center and unifying force of the Holy Orthodox Church- although the Russian Patriarchate has traditionally been understood as the strongest and most central.
In the history of the Church of Christ, as set out by the Holy Orthodox, the Church of Rome left the unity of the other Patriarchates in 1054 AD. By this time, either the barbarians from the North of Europe or the Muslim heresy had destroyed the Patriarchates of Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria. Constantinople had been under siege. The great Hagia Sophia was destined to become an empty shell. There had been weakening of these Patriarchates by the separations in the 5th and 6th centuries, by groups such as the Syrian Orthodox Church. But the torrent of Muslims and barbarians in the major, original Patriarchates left a physical fault line between the last remaining of the original Churches, the Patriarchate of Rome, and the other, newer Patriarchates of the East. Constantinople fell in the 15th century, but the differences in language and historical developments had already produced a pulling in the fabric of unity, which would fully unravel by the time, in the early years of the 11th century, the legate of the Pope in Rome laid the Bull of Excommunication in front of the Eastern Patriarch , just as he was getting ready to celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. There are other great wounds in the unity of the Body which we will explore further.
What happened to culminate in the 1054 AD definitive split? The true story may never be known until Christ Himself tells it; yet it is said that the claims of the Bishop of Rome to “First Among Equals”; or the Filioque dispute drove the Orthodox Patriarchates and the Patriarchate of Rome apart; it is also said, more sensationally, that there was an agreement made on both these points, yet due to a deception on the part of some bishops, the Orthodox faithful never understood this agreement and so over time, grew away from both the West and Rome. The Orthodox contend that Rome left the other Churches; but this seems hard to understand since none of the other original Patriarchates was in existence at that time, besides the waning Patriarchate of Constantinople. It may be closer to the truth that Rome, because it was also the seat of the Roman Empire, and had come to the rescue of the other Patriarchates (although futile, at the end), asserted its primacy as the Seat of St. Peter and the last remaining Patriarchate established in person by an Apostle. The reason for this assertion of primacy may be the perceived need of an authority to settle doctrinal disputes and to defend against heresies- and that the other Patriarchates were suspicious, in part, because the Bishop of Rome was too closely identified with the worldly power of the Emperor of Rome. Whatever the truth, it seems apparent that there was a final split in 1054 AD and the two branches of Christianity began to each look upon the other as “the separated”.
Many Westerners think that the major points of contention are the subtle but essential differences on the Filioque doctrine and the Succession of St. Peter as a “First Among Equals”. Perhaps these are important, but in the end, they are perhaps not quite at the root. Closer to the root of the separation has to do with the conception of “Church”- one of the same differences that Catholics have with Protestants, although the Orthodox and Protestants certainly do not have the same conceptions. The other fundamental difference has to do with the raison d’etre of the Christian life. East and West agree on Whom the Christian life is founded upon, but as I will explain, the Holy Orthodox claim a tremendous gulf in this area, and accuse the Catholic Church as being founded on worldliness rather than Christ; and thus, the life of the Catholic faithful is also corrupted by worldliness. The Orthodox see Protestantism as a logical outgrowth of this worldliness, “A Heresy the Daughter of a Heresy”. These two fundamental points, the conception of “Church” and the asserted corruption of the Christian life of the individual in the West, are the fault lines. In Part Three, we will discuss these two points.
