Introduction to Christian Orthodoxy
The other day somebody asked me about the initial divide and the principle differences between the Greek Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church. I began to answer, only to realize that I couldn’t answer. Aside from the role of the Pope, I didn’t know. Nobody else knew either. The resulting curiosity led to more tabs open on my computer screen at once than at any previous time (we’re talking 30 tabs, and that’s on a 12-inch computer). Following sufficient amounts of confusion and substantial amounts of reading, I’ve began to figure some things out.
This is an attempt to explain it to you in 10 minutes (though in reality it will be much more than that), so that you can save 30 tabs and 30 minutes per tab from your life.(
(Or if you’re particularly lazy, you can just watch a video)
Emergence of Orthodox Christianity
The Eastern Orthodox Church, officially called the Orthodox Catholic Church, is the second largest church in the world, with 225-300 million adherents. It is the religious denomination of the majority of people in Russia, as well as most countries in Eastern and Southeastern Europe.
The Roman Catholic Church, more generically referred to as the Catholic Church, is the world’s largest church, with 1.2 billion followers worldwide. Both churches, in addition to numerous other Christian churches around the world, refer to their church as the “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostle Church”.
It goes without saying that each church considers itself to be the one true church, and that all other Christian religious establishments are schismatic, heretical and/or just plain wrong.
Per the above declaration, each church traces its roots back to the earliest church established by St. Paul and the Apostles. Following the Orthodox view, the Assyrians and Orientals left the church in the first few centuries after Christ, and the Catholics became the largest group to leave the church in 1054, in what is known as the East-West Schism.
The term ‘Eastern’ distinguishes the church from Western Christendom and indicates that its sphere of influence is largely in the eastern part of the Christian world. The Greek term ‘Orthodox’, meaning a ‘true belief‘, was adopted by the church to distinguish itself from the growing body of non-orthodox Christians. ‘Catholic’, originally derived from Greek, means universal. (
The Roman Empire Adopting Christianity
In 313, Emperor Constantine and his co-emperor Licinius adopted the agreement traditionally known as the Edict of Milan. It granted Christians the freedom to worship openly, ordered the restoration of confiscated Christian property and extended religious toleration to other communities as well.
Christianity did not immediately become the official religion of the Roman Empire. That decisive change came in 380, when the emperors Theodosius I, Gratian and Valentinian II issued the Edict of Thessalonica, establishing Nicene Christianity as the Empire’s authorized form of Christian belief.
Long before the gradual separation of the Greek East and Latin West—conventionally associated with the Great Schism of 1054—Christianity had already experienced major divisions over the identity of Jesus Christ.
One of the most consequential occurred after the Council of Chalcedon, held in 451 at Chalcedon, across the Bosphorus from Constantinople in what is now Kadıköy. Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christians recognize it as the Fourth Ecumenical Council, while the churches now known as the Oriental Orthodox Churches rejected its definition. Oriental Orthodoxy should not be confused with Eastern Orthodoxy.
What does dyophysite mean?
The Chalcedonian definition teaches that Jesus Christ is one person—or one hypostasis—who exists in two complete natures, one divine and one human. These natures are united “without confusion, without change, without division and without separation.”
This position is called dyophysitism, from the Greek words for “two” and “nature.” It does not mean that there are two persons in Jesus. Chalcedonian Christians confess one and the same Christ, fully divine and fully human.
Dyophysitism must not be treated as another name for Nestorianism. Nestorianism was traditionally accused of separating Christ’s humanity and divinity so sharply that he appeared to become two personal subjects. Chalcedon explicitly rejected such a division by affirming that the two natures belong to one person and one hypostasis.
What does miaphysite mean?
The Oriental Orthodox Churches—including the Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Ethiopian, Eritrean and Malankara Orthodox traditions—are generally described as miaphysite.
Miaphysitism speaks of the “one incarnate nature of God the Word.” Here, “one nature” does not mean that Christ’s humanity disappeared, was swallowed by his divinity or never fully existed. It means that his complete divinity and complete humanity are united in one incarnate reality, without mixture, confusion, alteration, division or separation.
This differs from monophysitism, particularly the teaching associated with Eutyches that Christ’s humanity was absorbed or overwhelmed by his divinity. Oriental Orthodox Christians reject that position and therefore generally reject the label “Monophysite.”
Put simply:
Chalcedonian dyophysitism emphasizes that Christ’s divine and human natures remain distinct but inseparable in one person.
Oriental Orthodox miaphysitism emphasizes that Christ’s complete divinity and complete humanity exist in one united, incarnate nature.
Both traditions insist that Jesus Christ is fully God and fully human. Nevertheless, their historical disagreement should not be reduced to a meaningless choice of words. The theological vocabulary mattered because it was intended to protect different concerns: the completeness of Christ’s humanity and divinity, the distinction between them and the indivisible unity of Christ himself. The controversy also involved the authority of councils, the reception of particular theologians, imperial intervention and centuries of separate ecclesiastical development.
Modern dialogue has revealed substantial agreement. In 1973, Pope Paul VI and Coptic Orthodox Pope Shenouda III jointly affirmed that Christ is perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, united without confusion, alteration, division or separation. Similar agreements have since been reached with other Oriental Orthodox Churches. Yet these agreements have not erased every historical, ecclesiastical and doctrinal question, nor have they restored full communion between all the churches.
The crucial historical point, therefore, is not that “the Catholic Church became two” in 451. Rather, the Council of Chalcedon produced a lasting separation between the Chalcedonian churches and the communities that developed into the Oriental Orthodox family. Centuries later, the Chalcedonian world would experience another major division between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church.
The Great Schism
In the 11th century what has become known as the Great Schism took place between Rome and Constantinople. The principle doctrinal issues involved were the filioque clause and the authority of the Roman Pope, though these were exacerbated by political factors between church and state as well as cultural and linguistic differences between Latins and Greeks. For example, in leu of the fall of the Western Roman Empire, individuals who spoke both Greek and Latin began to disappear, which logically made communication between East and West substantially more difficult. Following the dissolution of linguistic unity, cultural unity began to crumble as well.
The Filioque Controversy
The filioque clause, found in most Western Christian churches but not present in any Orthodox churches, states only that the Holy Spirit proceeds “from the father and the son”. It was originally proposed to stress the relationship between the Son and the Spirit more clearly. There are two separate issues in the filioque controversy. The first deals with the veracity of the phrase itself, and the second is with regards to the legitimacy of the interpolation of the phrase into the Nicene Creed. These two issues became linked when the pope in Rome approved the insertion of the phrase in the 11th century. The debate then evolved from merely the orthodoxy of the doctrine into whether or not the pope had the ultimate authority to decide what was and what wasn’t orthodox.
The Eastern denial of the filioque cause was condemned by the West as a denial of the consubstantiality (God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit as one being) of the Father and the Son. As for the East, they viewed the Western interpolation of the phrase as an indication that the West was teaching a “substantially different faith”.(
The primacy of the Bishop of Rome, known more commonly as the Pope, is the other principle point of contention between the two entities. The Eastern Orthodox Church understands the position of the Pope to be one of great honor, but without effective power over other churches. The Roman Catholic Church, on the other hand, asserts that the power that the Pope holds over the church as “full, supreme and universal”. Even though those differences have been somewhat neutralized today (the Greek Patriarchy of Rome attended the inauguration of the new Pope Frances in an important symbolic gesture) there still exists controversy regarding the scriptural and theological foundations of the church and how the primacy is to be exercised. (
The Great Schism reached its threshold with the Fourth Crusade in 1204. The Latin Crusaders of Western Europe invaded and sacked the Eastern Orthodox city of Constantinople. Following the many horrors, atrocities, rapes, looting and pillages committed by the Latin crusaders, the Great Schism was officially complete.
Historians have gone on to call this extremely controversial event as “one of the greatest crimes against humanity”. In the past few years numerous attempts at reconciliation between the two churches have been made. Pope John Paul II addressed the matter of the 4th Crusade twice during his papacy, and in 2004 a formal apology was accepted by Bartholomew I, Patriarch of Constantinople.
Theological Differences
The Orthodox Church considers Jesus Christ to be the head of the Church and the Church to be his body. There is not one leader or bishop at the head of the Orthodox Church – i.e. they do not have the equivalent of the pope in Rome. Popular opinion that the Greek Patriarch of Constantinople (the Ecumenical Patriarch) is comparable to the pope is misplaced. It is clearly stated that he is one bishop among many, though he is ‘first among equals’ in the sense that he sits as organization head of a council of equals. He presides over any council of Orthodox bishops and serves as the primary spokesman for the Orthodox Communion, but he has no jurisdiction over the other patriarchs of Orthodox Churches (each bishop has a territory over which he governs). Had the East-West schism not occurred, the pope in Rome would still have honorary primacy over Orthodox Churches. Following the schism, however, the Orthodox no longer recognized the primacy of the pope.
Eastern Orthodoxy Priests are allowed to marry, though once married they cannot become bishops. The Roman Catholic Church places great emphasize on the idolization of Christ, while the Orthodox Church uses only paintings to remember him. The key word here is ‘remember’, such pictures, in other words, are not considered holy. Orthodox Churches use empty crosses while Roman Catholic churches use crosses ‘adorned’ with Jesus. The Roman Catholic Church places Mary above all other saints, but in Greek Orthodoxy all saints are regarded equal. In making the sign of the cross, Orthodox Christians go top to bottom, as the Catholics do, but then do the horizontal part by going first to the right, and then to the left. The final, the principally theological difference, worth noting is the issue of purgatory – the state or place of temporary purification or punishment immediately following death and before eternal heaven. The Orthodox Church generally does not use the word ‘purgatory’ and believes in offering prayers to God on behalf of the dead and believes that these prayers can help the recently deceased reach heaven.
Conclusion
The Catholic Church doesn’t consider the theological points of view of the East to be heresy, though the East considers the acceptance of the filioque clause by the Catholic church to be irreconcilable. They also criticize the Roman Catholic church as adopting too many untraditional policies (both hold that growth without change is of the utmost importance).
As pointed out earlier, numerous attempts have been made to bring the two churches closer together. The Catholic Church would probably accept a union of the two churches if the Eastern Orthodox Church were to agree to universal papal jurisdiction and papal infallibility, though the East would be hesitant to join based on, in their mind, considerable and noteworthy divergences in theological views.(
Boom! Hope that saved some time. And tabs.
Table of differences 🙂
| Feature | Orthodox Church | Catholic Church |
|---|---|---|
| Jesus Depiction | Focus on Christ in glory (Pantocrator) | Emphasis on Christ's suffering (Crucifix) |
| Leadership | Decentralized, Ecumenical Patriarchs | Centralized, Pope as the head of the Church |
| Clergy | Married priests allowed | Priests are celibate |
| Communion | Leavened bread | Unleavened bread |
| Icons/Statues | Revered icons (flat images) | Statues of saints and figures |
| Sign of Cross | Right to left | Left to right |
| Virgin Mary | Theotokos, but no Immaculate Conception | Immaculate Conception, born sinless |
| Purgatory | Prayers for the departed, no defined Purgatory | Belief in Purgatory as a purification state |
| Filioque | Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone | Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (Filioque) |
