Replies

Sir:

The Church you refer to is my Church, the Orthodox Church.
We WERE one until 1054 A.D. And the precise reason for that split, is because the Roman Pontiff of the time insisted on arrogance and political power, rather than following the teachings of the Holy fathers, the traditions of the Church, and the directives of the Holy Ecumenical Councils.

Now, I could quote reams of information and even quotes from Pope Gregory the Great, and the early church fathers to back up my position, but the bottom line is really this.

Pope Leo IX was one of the most corrupt, evil men that ever lived, and he was interested in gaining the support of Charlamagne and the Frankish Empire, rather than trying to keep the Holy Church intact. His arrogance led to the downfall of a united church. The Pope had always had the title of "first among equals" and that he could have again, if he wished, but too much water, and gaining of power has passed "under the bridge" to make that feasible. But I tell you, that is the KEY to reunion. I am very much aware of the scripture, but I challenge YOU to examine the basis of Papal Claims to supremacy. You will find that they weren't made until the 800's and were based on the Psuedo-Clementine writings, which have been rejected by Catholic scholars as false! I believe if you do this, it will be YOU that gets a "bolt from the blue" not I :)

I am very much aware of the scripture, but I challenge YOU to examine the basis of Papal Claims to supremacy. You will find that they weren't made until the 800's and were based on the Psuedo-Clementine writings,

I'm not Catholic but I find this interesting. In the Psuedo's Clement knew who the head of the church was which is why he corresponded with James in Jerusalem. I'd be interested to know how the basis of Papal Claims were gleaned from the Pseudo's? If that is so I missed the entired point of the writings.

The Church you refer to is my Church, the Orthodox Church.

I'm sorry. I don't follow. I wasn't referring specifically to the Orthodox. I apologize for a lack of precision.

We WERE one until 1054 A.D. And the precise reason for that split, is because the Roman Pontiff of the time insisted on arrogance and political power, rather than following the teachings of the Holy fathers, the traditions of the Church, and the directives of the Holy Ecumenical Councils.

My (very limited) understanding is that the split of 1054 A.D. is just a popular myth. Apparently the personalities involved at the point (Patriarch Cerularius and Cardinal Humbert) tried to excommunicate/anathematize each other, but the legal validity of at least Humbert's action were quite questionable because Pope Leo IX was already dead. There was no single event that marked the schism, but rather a sliding into and out of schism during a period of several centuries, punctuated with temporary reconciliations. The East’s final break with Rome did not come until the 1450s, long after the events you cite.

A tragic split? Absolutely.

I challenge YOU to examine the basis of Papal Claims to supremacy. You will find that they weren't made until the 800's and were based on the Psuedo-Clementine writings

That's a new one to me. Got a link or a reference?

Peace,