The division of the Christian Church into Catholic and Orthodox. When and why did Christianity divide into Orthodox, Catholic, etc.

It's no secret that Catholics and Orthodox Christians belong to the same religion - Christianity. But when, and most importantly, why did Christianity split into these two main movements? It turns out that human vices are to blame, as always; in this case, the heads of the church, the Pope and the Patriarch of Constantinople, were unable to determine which of them was more important and who should obey whom.

In 395, the Roman Empire was divided into Eastern and Western, and if the Eastern was a single state for several centuries, the Western soon disintegrated and became a union of various German principalities. The division of the empire also affected the situation in the Christian Church. Gradually, differences between the churches located in the east and in the west multiplied, and over time, relations began to become tense.

In 1054, Pope Leo IX sent legates to Constantinople led by Cardinal Humbert to resolve the conflict, which began with the closure of the Latin churches in Constantinople in 1053 by order of Patriarch Michael Cerularius, during which his sacellary Constantine threw out the Holy Sacraments prepared according to the tabernacles. Western custom from unleavened bread, and trampled them underfoot. However, it was not possible to find a path to reconciliation, and on July 16, 1054, in the Hagia Sophia, the papal legates announced the deposition of Cerularius and his excommunication from the Church. In response to this, on July 20, the patriarch anathematized the legates. That is, the heads of the church took it and excommunicated each other from it. From that moment on, the united church ceased to exist, and the future Catholic and Orthodox churches, cursed by each other, broke off relations for more than 900 years.

And only in 1964 in Jerusalem a meeting took place between the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras, the primate of the Orthodox Church of Constantinople, and Pope Paul VI, as a result of which in December 1965 the mutual anathemas were lifted and a Joint Declaration was signed. However, the “gesture of justice and mutual forgiveness” (Joint Declaration, 5) had no practical or canonical meaning.

From the Catholic point of view, the anathemas of the First Vatican Council against all who deny the doctrine of the primacy of the Pope and the infallibility of his judgments on matters of faith and morals pronounced ex cathedra (that is, when the Pope acts as the “earthly head”) remain in force and cannot be repealed. and mentor of all Christians"), as well as a number of other dogmatic decrees.

The term “Orthodoxy” or, which is the same thing, “orthodoxy” existed long before the division of churches: Clement of Alexandria in the 2nd century meant the true faith and unanimity of the entire church as opposed to dissent. The name “Orthodox” was strengthened by the Eastern Church after the church schism of 1054, when the Western Church appropriated the name “Catholic”, i.e. "universal".

This term (Catholicism) was used in the ancient creeds as the name of the entire Christian church. Ignatius of Antioch was the first to call the church “catholic.” After the division of the churches in 1054, both of them retained the name “Catholic” in their self-designations. In the process of historical development, the word “Catholic” began to refer only to the Roman Church. As a Catholic (“universal”) it opposed itself in the Middle Ages to the eastern Greek Church, and after the Reformation to the Protestant churches. However, almost all movements in Christianity have claimed and continue to claim “catholicity.”

Greetings to you, lovers of everything interesting. Today we would like to touch on religious topics, namely the division of the Christian Church into Orthodox and Catholic. Why did this happen? What contributed to this? You will learn about this in this article.

Christianity has its origins in the 1st century AD. It appeared on the lands of the pagan Roman Empire. During the period of the 4th–8th centuries, the doctrine of Christianity was strengthened and established. When it became the state religion of Rome, it began to spread not only within the state itself, but throughout the entire European continent. With the collapse of the Roman Empire, Christianity became the state religion. It so happened that it split into the western (with its center in Rome) and the eastern (with its center in Constantinople). The threat of schism (schism) began somewhere in the 8th-9th centuries. The reasons for this were different:

• Economic. Constantinople and Rome became self-sufficient, powerful economic centers of their territories. And they didn’t want to reckon with each other.
• Political. The desire to centralize in the hands not only economic independence, but also religious one. And the open confrontation between the Patriarchs of Constantinople and the Popes. It should be said here
• About the main difference: the Patriarch of Constantinople did not have enough power and the Byzantine emperors often interfered in his affairs. In Rome, everything was different. European monarchs needed the public support of the popes, receiving the crown from them.

The way of life of two different parts of the former part of the empire led to irreversible consequences of the split in Christianity.

In the 9th century, Pope Nicholas I and Patriarch Photius anathematized (cursed) each other. And already in the 11th century their hatred flared up with even greater force. In 1054, a final and irrevocable split in Christianity occurred. The reason for this was the greed and desire to seize the lands of Pope Leo IX, which were subordinate to the Patriarch of Constantinople. At this time, Michael Cerularius ruled in Constantinople. He harshly stopped Leo IX's attempts to seize these lands.

After this, Constantinople and Rome declared each other religious opponents. The Roman Church began to be called Catholic (that is, universal, world), and the Church of Constantinople - Orthodox, that is, truly faithful.

Thus, the main cause of the schism was the attempt of the high churchmen of Rome and Constantinople to influence and expand their borders. Subsequently, this struggle began to diverge in the beliefs of the two churches. The split in Christianity turned out to be a purely political factor.

A fundamental difference between the churches was the presence of such a body as the Inquisition, which exterminated people accused of heresy. At the present stage, in 1964, a meeting took place between Patriarch Athenagoras and Pope Paul VI, the result of which was an attempt at reconciliation. The very next year all mutual anathemas were lifted, but this had no real significance in practice.

The essence of the transformations was the correction and unification of church books and liturgical rites in accordance with contemporary Greek canons, which, in turn, was dictated by the expansion of ties with the Greek East.

Church reforms

At the end of the 1640s, a circle of “zealots of ancient piety” formed in Moscow. It included prominent church figures and secular persons: the tsar's confessor Stefan Vonifatiev, archpriest of the Kazan Cathedral on Red Square Ivan Neronov, archimandrite of the Novospassky Monastery, future patriarch, Nikon, okolnichy F.M. Rtishchev. The most notable of the provincial “zealots” was from Yuryevets Povolzhsky. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich clearly favored the mug. The purpose of his program was to introduce liturgical uniformity, correct errors and discrepancies in church books, as well as strengthen the moral foundations of the clergy.

The first attempts at reform were made at the same time in the 1640s. But by the end of the 40s the circle had lost its former unanimity. Some “zealots” (Ivan Neronov, Avvakum) advocated editing books based on ancient Russian manuscripts, others (Vonifatiev, Nikon, Rtishchev) advocated turning to Greek models and statutes. In essence, it was a dispute about Russia’s place in the Orthodox world. Nikon believed that Russia, in order to fulfill its world mission, must internalize the values ​​of Greek Orthodox culture. Avvakum believed that Russia did not need external borrowing. As a result, the point of view of Nikon, who became patriarch in 1652, won. At the same time, he began his reform, designed to eliminate differences in the rituals of the Eastern and Russian churches. This was also important in connection with the outbreak of the struggle with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for the annexation of Ukraine.

The changes affected the ritual side of the service: now instead of sixteen bows it was necessary to make four; to be baptized not with two, but with three fingers (those who refused to do this were excommunicated from the church from 1656); perform religious processions not in the direction of the sun, but against the sun; during the service, shout “Hallelujah” not twice, but three times, etc. Since 1654, icons painted in the “Fryazhsky”, that is, foreign style, began to be confiscated.

A large-scale “book right” has also begun. A new Service Book was introduced into church use, based on the Greek edition of 1602. This caused many discrepancies with Russian liturgical books. Thus, the correction of books, carried out according to modern Greek models, in practice did not take into account not only the ancient Russian manuscript tradition, but also the ancient Greek manuscripts.

Such changes were perceived by many believers as an encroachment on the purity of Orthodoxy and caused protest, which led to a split in the church and society.

Split

Officially, the schism as a religious and social movement existed since the Council of 1667 decided to condemn and excommunicate adherents of the old rites - the Old Believers - as people who refused to obey the authority of the official church. In fact, it appeared from the beginning of Nikon’s reforms.

Historians define the causes, content and significance of this phenomenon in different ways. Some view the schism as an exclusively church movement defending the “old times,” while others see it as a complex sociocultural phenomenon in the form of church protest.

The Old Believers included representatives of different groups of the population: white and black clergy, boyars, townspeople, archers, Cossacks, and peasants. According to various estimates, from one quarter to one third of the population went into schism.

Leaders of the schism

The largest representative of the early Old Believers was Archpriest Avvakum Petrov. He became practically the first opponent of Nikon's reform. In 1653, he was sent into exile in Siberia, where he endured severe hardships and suffering for his faith. In 1664 he returned to Moscow, but was soon exiled to the North again. At the Church Council of 1666, he and his associates were stripped of their hair, anathematized and exiled to Pustozersk. The place of exile became the ideological center of the Old Believers, from where messages from the Pustozero elders were sent throughout Russia. In 1682, Avvakum and his fellow prisoners were executed by burning in a log house. Avvakum’s views were reflected in his works: “The Book of Conversations”, “The Book of Interpretations and Moral Teachings”, “The Book of Reproofs”, and the autobiographical “Life”.

In the second half of the 17th century, a number of bright schism teachers appeared - Spiridon Potemkin, Ivan Neronov, Lazar, Epiphanius, Nikita Pustoyasvyat, etc. Women, primarily the noblewoman, occupied a special place among them. She made her house in Moscow a stronghold of the Old Believers. In 1671 she was imprisoned in an earthen prison, where she died in 1675. Her sister E.P. died along with her. Urusova and Maria Danilova.

The largest protest against the reforms was. Nikon's opponents flocked to the city and, together with the monks, fought the tsarist troops for eight years.

Ideology of the split

The ideological basis of the Old Believers was the doctrine of the “Third Rome” and “The Tale of the White Cowl,” condemned by the council of 1666-1667. Since Nikon’s reform destroyed true Orthodoxy, the Third Rome, that is, Moscow, found itself on the verge of destruction, the coming of the Antichrist and the end of the world. Apocalyptic sentiments occupied an important place in the early Old Believers. The question of the date of the end of the world was raised. Several interpretations have appeared about the coming of the Antichrist: according to some, he has already come into the world in the person of Nikon, according to others, Nikon was only his forerunner, according to others, a “mental” Antichrist already exists in the world. If the Third Rome fell and there was no fourth, it means that sacred history is over, the world turned out to be forsaken by God, therefore the supporters of the old faith must leave the world, flee to the “desert.” The places where the schismatics fled were the Kerzhenets region of the Nizhny Novgorod region, Poshekhonye, ​​Pomorie, Starodubye, the Urals, Trans-Urals, and the Don.

The Old Believers attached great importance to preserving the inviolability of rituals not only in their content, but also in their form. Nikon's innovations, they believed, were destroying the canon, and therefore the faith itself. Also, the schismatics did not recognize the priesthood of the Russian Church, which, in their opinion, had lost grace. But at the same time, the Old Believers did not doubt the divinity of the royal power and hoped that the king would come to his senses.

The Old Believers defended the traditional system of cultural values, opposing the spread of secular education and culture. For example, Avvakum denied science and spoke extremely negatively about new trends in painting.

Thus, the preservation of the national tradition in the spirit of the Old Believers was fraught with spiritual conservatism and separation from cultural progress for its adherents.

The practice of self-immolation

Broad eschatological sentiments among the Old Believers led many to an extreme form of denial of the world in which the Antichrist reigned - namely, to leaving it through self-immolation. Many “burnings” were committed in response to persecution by the authorities. By the end of the 17th century, more than 20 thousand people died in this way. Archpriest Avvakum considered “fiery baptism” the path to purification and eternal bliss. Some cleavers were against the practice of "garei", such as the monk Euphrosynus. But in the last decades of the 17th century, Habakkuk’s view prevailed.

Section of the Old Believers

At the end of the 17th century, the Old Believers were divided into priests, who recognized the institution of the priesthood and accepted repentant priests of the Orthodox Church, and non-priests, who denied the existing church hierarchy and retained only baptism and confession from the sacraments. These two movements, in turn, gave rise to many opinions and agreements that determined the development of the Old Believers in the 18th-19th centuries.

The split of the Russian Church in the 17th century is a truly tragic page in the history of our country. The consequences of the split have not yet been overcome.

Hello Simon.

Let's start by defining the meaning of the words "Catholic", "Orthodox", "Protestant". I will try to use so that the text contains a minimum of subjective information.

Orthodoxy (tracing paper from Greek “orthodoxy”, lit. “correct judgment”)

Protestantism (from the Latin protestans, gen. protestantis - publicly proving) is one of the three, along with Catholicism and Orthodoxy, main directions of Christianity, which is a collection of numerous and independent Churches and denominations associated in their origin with the Reformation - a broad anti-Catholic movement XVI century in Europe.

The schism of the Christian Church in 1054 is a church schism, after which the Christian Church was finally divided into the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, centered in Constantinople.

In fact, disagreements between the Pope and the Patriarch of Constantinople began long before 1054, but it was in 1054 that Pope Leo IX sent legates to Constantinople led by Cardinal Humbert to resolve the conflict, which began with the closure of 1053 Latin churches in Constantinople by order of Patriarch Michael Cyrularius , in which his “chancellor” Nikephoros threw out the Holy Gifts, prepared according to Western custom from unleavened bread, from the tabernacles, and trampled them under his feet. However, it was not possible to find a path to reconciliation, and on July 16, 1054, in the Cathedral of Hagia Sophia, the papal legates announced the deposition of Kirularius and his excommunication from the Church. In response to this, on July 20, the patriarch anathematized the legates.

The split has not yet been overcome, although in 1965 the mutual curses were lifted.

The schism had many reasons: ritual, dogmatic, ethical differences between the Western and Eastern Churches, property disputes, the struggle between the Pope and the Patriarch of Constantinople for primacy among the Christian patriarchs, different languages ​​of worship (Latin in the Western Church and Greek in the Eastern).

You can also find even more detailed information on the topic of the Great Schism.

Emergence of Protestantism, Reformation(from Latin reformatio - transformation) - a social movement in Western and Central Europe in the 16th century, directed against the traditions of the Christian faith that had developed in the Catholic Church.

The Reformation began with the speech of Martin Luther in Germany in 1517. The ideologists of the Reformation put forward theses that actually denied both the need for the Catholic Church with its hierarchy, and for the clergy in general. The Catholic Sacred Tradition was rejected, the rights of the church to land wealth were denied, etc.

The Reformation marked the beginning of Protestantism (in the narrow sense, reformation is the implementation of religious reforms in its spirit).

The Bible's point of view. However, if you want an answer about the reasons for the splits precisely from the point of view of the Bible, it will be somewhat different: the Bible writes about this in several books (I recommend Jacques Ducan’s study of the book of Daniel!). This is a very extensive separate topic.

Read more on the topic "Religion, rituals and the church":

Christianity is the largest religion in the world by number of followers. But today it is divided into many denominations. And an example was set a long time ago - in 1054, when the Western Church excommunicated Eastern Christians, rejecting them as if they were aliens. Since then, many more events have followed that only worsened the situation. So why and how the division of churches into Roman and Orthodox happened, let's figure it out.

Prerequisites for the split

Christianity was not always the dominant religion. Suffice it to remember that all the first Popes, starting with the Apostle Peter, ended their lives as martyrdom for the faith. For centuries, the Romans tried to exterminate an obscure sect whose members refused to make sacrifices to their gods. The only way for Christians to survive was unity. The situation began to change only with the coming to power of Emperor Constantine.

Global differences in the views of the Western and Eastern branches of Christianity clearly revealed themselves only centuries later. Communication between Constantinople and Rome was difficult. Therefore, these two directions developed on their own. And at the dawn of the second millennium they became noticeable ritual differences:

But this, of course, was not the reason for the split of Christianity into Orthodoxy and Catholicism. The bishops in charge increasingly began to disagree. Conflicts arose, the resolution of which was not always peaceful.

Photius schism

This split occurred in 863 and lasted for several years.. The head of the Church of Constantinople was then Patriarch Photius, and Nicholas I was on the Roman throne. The two hierarchs had difficult personal relationships, but formally the reason for disagreement was given by Rome’s doubts about Photius’ rights to lead the Eastern churches. The power of the hierarchs was complete, and it still extends not only to ideological issues, but also to the management of lands and finances. Therefore, at times the struggle for it was quite tough.

It is believed that the real reason for the quarrel between the heads of the church was the attempts of the Western governor to include the Balkan Peninsula under his guardianship.

The election of Photius was the result of internal dissensions, who then reigned in the eastern part of the Roman Empire. Patriarch Ignatius, who was replaced by Photius, was deposed thanks to the machinations of Emperor Michael. Supporters of the conservative Ignatius turned to Rome for justice. And the Pope tried to take advantage of the moment and take the Patriarchate of Constantinople under his influence. The matter ended in mutual anathemas. The next church council that took place temporarily managed to moderate the zeal of the parties, and peace reigned (temporarily).

Controversy over the use of unleavened dough

In the 11th century the complication of the political situation resulted in another aggravation of the confrontation between the Western and Eastern rituals. Patriarch Michael of Constantinople did not like the fact that the Latins began to displace representatives of the Eastern churches in the Norman territories. Cerularius retaliated by closing all the Latin churches in his capital. This event was accompanied by rather unfriendly behavior - unleavened bread was thrown into the street, and the priests of Constantinople trampled it underfoot.

The next step was theological rationale for the conflict - message against the Latin rite. It brought forward many accusations of violating church traditions (which, however, had not previously bothered anyone):

The work, of course, reached the head of the Roman throne. In response, Cardinal Humbert composed the “Dialogue” message. All these events took place in 1053. There was very little time left before the final divergence between the two branches of the single church.

Great Schism

In 1054 Pope Leo wrote to Constantinople, demanding recognition of his full power over the Christian Church. As justification, a forged document was used - the so-called deed of gift, in which Emperor Constantine allegedly transferred the management of churches to the Roman throne. The claims were rejected, to which the Supreme Bishop of Rome equipped an embassy. It was supposed, among other things, to obtain military assistance from Byzantium.

The fateful date was July 16, 1054. On this day the unity of the Christian Church formally ceased. Although by that time Leo I. X. had already died, the papal legates still came to Michael. They entered the Cathedral of St. Sophia and placed on the altar a letter in which the Patriarch of Constantinople anathematized. The response message was drawn up 4 days later.

What was the main reason for the division of churches? Here the opinions of the parties differ. Some historians believe that this is the result of a struggle for power. For Catholics, the main thing was the reluctance to recognize the primacy of the Pope as the successor of the Apostle Peter. For Orthodox Christians, the debate about the Filioque - the procession of the Holy Spirit - plays an important role.

Rome's arguments

In a historical document, Pope Leo for the first time clearly formulated the reasons, according to which all other bishops should recognize the primacy of the Roman see:

• Since the Church stands on the firmness of Peter’s confession, moving away from it is a big mistake.
• Anyone who questions the authority of the Pope also renounces Saint Peter.
• He who rejects the authority of the Apostle Peter is an arrogant proud man who independently plunges himself into the abyss.

Arguments of Constantinople

Having received an appeal from the papal legates, Patriarch Michael urgently assembled the Byzantine clergy. The result was accusations against the Latins:

For some time, Rus' remained aloof from the conflict, although initially it was under the influence of the Byzantine rite and recognized Constantinople, not Rome, as the spiritual center. The Orthodox have always made the dough for prosphoras using sourdough. Formally, in 1620, a local council condemned the Catholic rite to use unleavened dough for church sacraments.

Is a reunion possible?

Great Schism(translated from ancient Greek - schism) occurred quite a long time ago. Today, relations between Catholicism and Orthodoxy are no longer as strained as in past centuries. In 2016, there was even a brief meeting between Patriarch Kirill and Pope Francis. Such an event seemed impossible 20 years ago.

Although mutual anathemas were lifted in 1965, the reunification of the Roman Catholic Church with the Autocephalous Orthodox Churches (and there are more than a dozen of them, the Russian Orthodox Church is only one of the professing Orthodoxy) is unlikely today. The reasons for this are no less than a thousand years ago.

It is not so important in what year the schism of the Christian church occurred. The more important thing is that today the church represents many movements and churches- both traditional and newly created. People failed to preserve the unity bequeathed by Jesus Christ. But those who call themselves Christians should learn patience and mutual love, and not look for reasons to move further apart from each other.