Revision as of 01:12, 26 July 2016 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,307,823 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:East–West Schism/Archive 8) (bot← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:19, 26 September 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,307,823 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:East–West Schism/Archive 8) (bot | ||
(62 intermediate revisions by 32 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header}} | {{Talk header}} | ||
{{Not a forum}} | |||
{{Vital article|topic=History |level=4 |class=C}} | |||
{{On this day|date1=2005-12-07|oldid1=30302760 }} | {{On this day|date1=2005-12-07|oldid1=30302760 }} | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1= | |||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | |||
{{WikiProject Christianity| |
{{WikiProject Christianity|importance=Top |theology-work-group=yes |theology-importance=Top |catholicism=yes |catholicism-importance=Top |eastern-orthodoxy=yes |eastern-orthodoxy-importance=Top }} | ||
{{WikiProject European history|importance=high }} | |||
{{WikiProject Middle Ages|importance=High }} | |||
{{WikiProject Greece|importance=mid|topic=history|byzantine-task-force=yes}} | |||
|eastern-orthodoxy=yes |eastern-orthodoxy-importance=Top | |||
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=mid|Interfaith=yes}} | |||
|core-topics-work-group = yes |core-topics-importance=Top | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Copied | |||
{{WikiProject European history|class=c |importance=high }} | |||
|from1 = East–West Schism | |||
{{WikiProject Middle Ages|class=C |importance=High }} | |||
|from_oldid1 = 521379119 | |||
{{WP1.0|class=C|category=category|VA=yes|WPCD=yes}} | |||
|to1 = Primacy of the Bishop of Rome | |||
|to_diff1 = 521379635 | |||
|to_oldid1 = 520850463 | |||
|date1 = 2012-11-04T12:10:02 | |||
|from2 = East–West Schism#Other points of conflict | |||
|from_oldid2 = 921808857 | |||
|to2 = 15th-16th century Moscow–Constantinople schism | |||
|to_diff2 = 922823306 | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Archive box|search=yes |bot=Lowercase sigmabot III |age=1 |units=month |index=/Archive index | | |||
{{Copied|from=East–West Schism|from_oldid=521379119|to=Primacy of the Bishop of Rome|to_diff=521379635|to_oldid=520850463|date=2012-11-04T12:10:02}} | |||
{{Off topic warning}} | |||
{{Archive box|search=yes |bot=MiszaBot I |age=1 |units=month |index=/Archive index | | |||
* ] <small>(Dec 2004 – Jan 2009)</small> | * ] <small>(Dec 2004 – Jan 2009)</small> | ||
* ] <small>(January–March 2009)</small> | * ] <small>(January–March 2009)</small> | ||
Line 37: | Line 45: | ||
}} | }} | ||
== Section on Hell == | |||
== Kirill and Francis joint statement == | |||
{{relevant discussion|Talk:Joint Declaration of Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill#NPOV diligence}} | |||
{{diff|East–West Schism|prev|704880369|I added}}:{{talkquote|In February 2016, Pope Francis, of the Roman Catholic Church, and Patriarch Kirill, of the Russian Orthodox Church, met at José Martí International Airport near Havana, Cuba, and signed a thirty point joint declaration, prepared in advance, addressing global issues including their hope for re–establishment of full unity.}} | |||
into {{Section link|East–West Schism|Other moves toward reconciliation}} | |||
{{user|Axxxion}} {{diff|East–West Schism|prev|704989960|removed it}} from that section because it had {{tq|"vry scant relevance to the topic"}} and {{diff|East–West Schism|prev|704990297|added it}} into {{Section link|East–West Schism|Eastern Catholicism}} were {{tq|"it is much more relevant for this"}} | |||
{{user|Spirit Ethanol}} {{diff|East–West Schism|prev|705081912|added a section}} about the ] into the History below {{Section link|East–West Schism|Nullification of mutual anathemas in 1965}} | |||
Axxxion {{diff|East–West Schism|prev|705095905|removed}} Spirit Ethanol's section because there is a {{tq|"link to the article about this statement and the mention thereof is above: journalistic hoopla, mostly feeding on blatant ignorance, apart, it has no significance for this section."}} I.e. the East–West Schism § Other moves toward reconciliation where I also thought this content should go. | |||
What I read online shows a consensus that this document and the meeting of Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill are both historic and not as Axxxion wrote: {{tq|"journalistic hoopla, mostly feeding on blatant ignorance"}}. I only saw that opinion on some radical orthodox sites that I would call fringe. | |||
The document and the meeting are both seen more as "Other moves toward reconciliation" than "Eastern Catholicism" – since there are only a few points about Eastern Catholicism in this 30 point document. –] (]) 23:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
: I agree with {{user|BoBoMisiu}}, meeting/joint statement should be in ''History'' section. ] (]) 08:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
::What I actually meant is that this article, due to its content, is meant to be scholarly (unlike some others that cover current international affairs). By reading mass media coverage, all I can gather is that the overwhelming majority of journalists have not the faintest idea of what they are writing about (the sole exception I have come across is this Polish author′s article in the Polish edition of Newsweek: ). Which is all but natural, as they have no theological education and essentially treat this event as a pow–wow between two prominent statesmen (celebrities), which is fair enough but has no relevance hereto. As this article is not on international affairs, I am quite satisfied that opinions expressed by non-experts (mainstream press journalists) are not authoritative references for the purposes of this article. That does not mean that those should not be presented here; but they ought to be presented as (uneducated) opinions of journalists, as this is what they are. To every one who has any understanding of the subject, it is clear that this paper is worth just the cost of paper it is written on: Patriarch Kirill has no authority to speak on behalf of Eastern Christians, or even on behalf of the ROC for that matter. And he actually does not pretend to: the document contains absolute zilch relevant to reconciliation of East and West. That is if you read the document, not what the journalists write.] (]) 14:35, 16 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
::], That said, I do respect your opinion and appreciate the fact that you and ] have not rushed to reverting. I am open to discussion on this, and would propose we wait for some impartial expert analysis of the event, in line with ], which ought to be honoured for such article covering nearly two millennia of controversial history. Let us endeavor to keep things in perspective: we are not after copy, are we?] (]) 15:00, 16 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
::P.S. Incidentally, the Russian media is putting a strictly (geo)political spin on the tryst, as they know full well who is Kirill and on whose behalf he speaks (just one example from the biggest print-run Moscow tabloid, an interview by a very popular clergyman of the ROC (!) and a thoroughly educated theologian ]: ("Having met the pope, Kirill fulfilled the party′s task"): "для Папы эта встреча по большому счету не значит ничего. Он здесь точно ничего не теряет и вряд ли приобретает что-то серьезное. Для него это, в общем, символическая история. И достаточно привычная: он каждый день проводит такие встречи с лидерами разных стран и самых разных религий, конфессий. А у патриарха, во-первых, "партийное поручение", которое важно не провалить, правильно исполнить. И второе: патриарх разговаривает сейчас не только с папой. .... - Под "партийным поручением" вы имеет в виду то, что он выступает как посланец Путина? - В общем, да."). They do understand who made this meeting (solicited in vain by the Vatican for decades) possible and to what ends: as is pretty clear, the Kremlin′s message was in effect meant for the U.S. and its satellites in Europe: You start respecting us now, Or we shall nuke you all! (See: -- To those who understand the Kremlinspeak, this signifies a direct threat and blackmail.)] (]) 15:13, 16 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
::I personally was struck by the way the Pope looked when Kirill spoke to the press after the talks: he was physically depressed, not to say crushed.] (]) 15:38, 16 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::{{ping|Axxxion}} I agree with you. I understand the revolutionary Marxist politics and the religious conflict; I noticed Kirill did not pray with Francis and I noticed the prominent placement of the icon of Our Lady of Kazan. I see it. The document is historic, the content about it will develop, but Misplaced Pages is not limited to scholarly sources – especially on a recent event. The journal articles will be published in time. The document is a common statement on several world issues by the two religious leaders of the largest groups of the East–West Schism. It is a rapprochement. The world has to wait to see the many ways the document will be exploited by the Russian government, not ]. The content of the document is not only about Ukraine or about Eastern Catholic Churches. There is analysis of the event and of the document which will, no doubt, change over time. You add facts about what the document states, how commentary explains it, how it is exploited (it inevitably will be), and the perspective will develop then. Nevertheless, the meeting and document is historic and is a move toward reconciliation. –] (]) 15:52, 16 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::From the facts you have bullet–pointed above, it appears to be a move toward one′s own trench. We now have a full-on article on the Declaration. ″Especially on a recent event″ — precisely my point: THIS article is essentially about the event that happened nine hundred years ago.] (]) 16:18, 16 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::As for ″speculation″: journalists calling it ″historic″ is a sheer speculative assessment for the purposes of ]. What we actually have in the document? "it is our hope that our meeting may contribute to the re–establishment of this unity willed by God" -- Ok, let us wait and see if it WILL contribute WHEN/IF that reconciliation does actually happen.] (]) 16:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::::{{ping|Axxxion}} the meeting is historic because it is the first of its kind – there is no speculation that Kirill is the first Russian patriarch to meet and kiss a pope. The document is historic because it points out 30 points of common understanding about world issues between the patriarch of the largest Orthodox church and the pope – it is also the first of its kind – a move toward reconciliation by acknowledging that Catholic and Orthodox are "divided by wounds caused by old and recent conflicts, by differences inherited from our ancestors, in the understanding and expression of our faith in God, one in three Persons" (n. 5). "Mindful of the permanence of many obstacles," the meeting is a "sign of hope" for those who desire "tangible gestures" and "may contribute to the re–establishment of this unity willed by God" (n.6). "In our determination to undertake all that is necessary to overcome the historical divergences we have inherited, we wish to combine our efforts to give witness to the Gospel of Christ and to the shared heritage of the Church of the first millennium, responding together to the challenges of the contemporary world. Orthodox and Catholics must learn to give unanimously witness in those spheres in which this is possible and necessary. Human civilization has entered into a period of epochal change. Our Christian conscience and our pastoral responsibility compel us not to remain passive in the face of challenges requiring a shared response" (n.7). These words are not a reconciliation but are a move toward reconciliation. –] (]) 19:53, 16 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Again, I believe we would be better off if we take a pause and see how this declaration is going to play out further down the road. The main reason for caution is that this NOT the Pope′s meeting with the leader of the Eastern Church, but only with the leader one of the patriarchates, a relatively junior one at that. This is a consequential point that news media coverage overlooks, as the journalists, even those aware of the diptychs ranking, tend to think the size means might. Any one who has an idea how Eastern Church operates as a whole, knows this is not true. And size is a very tricky thing in this department. The Ecumenical Patriarch′s flock (the Greek lobby in the US) marshals influence commensurate with the influence of all other patriarchates put together.] (]) 18:14, 17 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
== External links modified == | |||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
I have just added archive links to {{plural:30|one external link|30 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes: | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110720051937/http://loki.stockton.edu/~papadema/Syndey_Palatianos.pdf to http://loki.stockton.edu/~papadema/Syndey_Palatianos.pdf | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120723192152/http://www.orthodoxanswers.org/history to http://www.orthodoxanswers.org/history | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130110112941/http://www.aoiusa.org:80/canon-28-and-eastern-papalism-cause-or-effect/ to http://www.aoiusa.org/canon-28-and-eastern-papalism-cause-or-effect/ | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100412093028/http://www.stpaulsirvine.org:80/html/TheGreatSchism.htm to http://www.stpaulsirvine.org/html/TheGreatSchism.htm | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110914171457/http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1997/issue54/54h010.html to http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1997/issue54/54h010.html | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100510123826/http://www.patriarchate.org:80/patriarchate/history to http://www.patriarchate.org/patriarchate/history | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120526130238/http://www.monachos.net/content/patristics/studies-themes/251-council-of-chalcedon-451-resource-materials to http://www.monachos.net/content/patristics/studies-themes/251-council-of-chalcedon-451-resource-materials | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100510123826/http://www.patriarchate.org:80/patriarchate/history to http://www.patriarchate.org/patriarchate/history | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130123034712/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Council_of_Chalcedon to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Council_of_Chalcedon | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130610034842/http://rbedrosian.com/Maps/ahgh66b.htm to http://rbedrosian.com/Maps/ahgh66b.htm | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130213233630/http://home.comcast.net/~DiazStudents/MiddleAgesChurchMap1.jpg to http://home.comcast.net/~DiazStudents/MiddleAgesChurchMap1.jpg | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150910072258/http://www.cartileonline.eu/carte/1025738/dragan-brujia-vodia-kroz-svet-vizantijeDragan to http://www.cartileonline.eu/carte/1025738/dragan-brujia-vodia-kroz-svet-vizantijeDragan | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100412093028/http://www.stpaulsirvine.org:80/html/TheGreatSchism.htm to http://www.stpaulsirvine.org/html/TheGreatSchism.htm | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130311221040/http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/dialogue-with-others/ecumenical/orthodox/filioque-church-dividing-issue-english.cfmAgreed to http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/dialogue-with-others/ecumenical/orthodox/filioque-church-dividing-issue-english.cfmAgreed | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131214215215/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/02/guardianobituaries.catholicismObituary to http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/02/guardianobituaries.catholicismObituary | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081226130223/http://www.vatican.va:80/edocs/ENG0221/__PT.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0221/__PT.HTM | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081225180911/http://www.vatican.va:80/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p2.htm to http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p2.htm | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090115101247/http://www.bookofconcord.org:80/creeds.html to http://www.bookofconcord.org/creeds.html | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090102212208/http://www.kaldu.org:80/14_Reformed_ChaldeanMass/QA_NewMass.html to http://www.kaldu.org/14_Reformed_ChaldeanMass/QA_NewMass.html | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090105041142/http://www.pelagia.org:80/htm/b02.en.orthodox_psychotherapy.06.htm to http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b02.en.orthodox_psychotherapy.06.htm#2k | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090106070353/http://www.pelagia.org:80/htm/b02.en.orthodox_psychotherapy.03.htm to http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b02.en.orthodox_psychotherapy.03.htm | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090225105941/http://pelagia.org:80/htm/b02.en.orthodox_psychotherapy.03.htm to http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b02.en.orthodox_psychotherapy.03.htm#in | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090326044427/http://www.pelagia.org:80/htm/b05.en.the_illness_and_cure_of_the_soul.02.htm to http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b05.en.the_illness_and_cure_of_the_soul.02.htm#Fall | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090113180247/http://www.stmaryorthodoxchurch.org:80/orthodoxy/articles/2004-hughes-sin.php to http://www.stmaryorthodoxchurch.org/orthodoxy/articles/2004-hughes-sin.php | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110712214225/http://store.holycrossbookstore.com/970730314.html to http://store.holycrossbookstore.com/970730314.html | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090220001723/http://www.vatican.va:80/archive/catechism/p123a12.htm to http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a12.htm#III | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090220174131/http://www.vatican.va:80/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a8.htm to http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a8.htm | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090219210756/http://pelagia.org:80/htm/b24.en.life_after_death.05.htm to http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b24.en.life_after_death.05.htm#pu2 | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090201132350/http://www.pelagia.org:80/htm/b24.en.life_after_death.07.htm to http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b24.en.life_after_death.07.htm | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090201132350/http://www.pelagia.org:80/htm/b24.en.life_after_death.07.htm to http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b24.en.life_after_death.07.htm#par2 | |||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}). | |||
I significantly modified this section as it relates to Eastern Orthodoxy, since it contained blatant errors such as claiming that the Orthodox believe there "is no hell," and made sweeping generalizations and universal, doctrinal claims on behalf of Orthodoxy as a whole, when even the Misplaced Pages article on hell, in the Orthodox subsection, clearly states and explains the variety of opinion in this area, and the lack of a single, official doctrine, as is found in Catholicism. | |||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false}} | |||
] (]) 10:06, 2 September 2021 (UTC) | |||
Cheers.—]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">]:Online</sub></small> 12:24, 28 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
: There is no reference to Hell in the Orthodox Liturgy or the Latin Mass, unlike with the Lutheran Liturgy and Eucharist of the Church of England. I am also uncertain as to whether there is a concept of eternal punishment in the Orthodox Church as God is stated in the Liturgy to be all loving, merciful and forgiving. Perhaps a reference is needed or possibly a different wording where it is presently stated that "there is damnation or punishment in eternity for the rejection of God's grace". Not being graced by the presence of God does not necessarily imply one is punished or damned by God. There is a good presentation in the Orthodox wiki: https://el.orthodoxwiki.org/Κόλαση - that the distancing from God's grace is a voluntary choice and not a punishment imposed by God as is made clear by a cited quote from St John of Damascus: "Και τούτο ειδέναι δει, ότι ο Θεός ου κολάζει τινά εν τω μελλόντι αλλ' έκαστος εαυτόν δεκτικόν ποιεί της μετοχής του Θεού. Εστίν η μεν μετοχή του Θεού τρυφή, η δε αμεθεξία αυτού κόλασις" - God does not punish but each one decides on his receiving of God, whose reception is joy and his absence a Hell. I am inclined to slightly change the current text to better reflect the Orthodox Christian view that God does not punish. ] (]) 17:33, 17 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
== External links modified == | |||
::My comments on Hell which were backed up by references, were reverted by another editor, even though I had added this comment in the talk section several weeks before making the change and the change had remained for a year without discussion in the talk section. Unless I receive a good explanation I will refer the issue to the arbitration committee. Please explain.] (]) 18:34, 7 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
== Reason and Orthodoxy == | |||
I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes: | |||
The statement that "Eastern Orthodox theologians argue that the mind (reason, rationality) is the focus of Western theology, whereas, in Eastern theology, the mind must be put in the heart, so they are united into what is called nous; this unity as heart is the focus of Eastern Orthodox Christianity" is based on a reference by the American Romanian Carpathian Church. I am not sure this interpretation (and the entire paragraph that follows it) is representative. Of course, it is in the nature of the Orthodox tradition that there are differences in interpretation of the sacred texts because their meaning depends somewhat on the education and understanding of the individual. However, the contrary position has many defendants: The opening of the Gospel of St John quotes Heraclitus: In the arche (first principle) there was Logos ... Through it everything came to be". Heraclitus by Logos meant Reason (in fact that is what the word means in Greek). The translation into Latin as "In the beginning was the Word" certainly does not reflect Heraclitus accurately and rather detracts from the position of Logos (Reason) in Christian thought. St John the Evangelist lived in Ephesus, the city where Heraclitus had lived, and the reference to Heraclitus could not have been accidental. See also https://orthodoxwiki.org/Logos and https://www.orthodox-theology.com/media/PDF/IJOT1-2010/12-popescu-trinity.pdf ] (]) 12:57, 17 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120623001926/http://www.stmarysnova.org:80/documents/church-mission to http://www.stmarysnova.org/documents/church-mission | |||
:{{ping|Skamnelis}} OrthodoxWiki is a ] so it cannot be used as a source on Misplaced Pages articles. If you have a good source more authoritative than the current one to support the change you want (e.g. Kallistos Ware's ''The Orthodox Church'' or ''The Encyclopedia of Eastern Orthodox Christianity''), feel free to use it. ] (]) 19:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}). | |||
::After the response that OrthodoxWiki is a WP:SPS so it cannot be used as a source on Misplaced Pages articles, I had added a reference from Kallistos Ware that seems to have been lost in favour of a statement from a publication attributed to the Romanian Carpathian Church. I do not see why the latter is more representative. At the very least the editor should have opted for presenting the range of views. Unless I have a good explanation, I will refer this issue to the arbitration committee. ] (]) 18:47, 7 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
== Move discussion in progress == | |||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false}} | |||
There is a move discussion in progress on ] which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. <!-- Talk:2018 Moscow–Constantinople schism#Requested move 25 April 2024 crosspost --> —] 15:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
Cheers.—]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">]:Online</sub></small> 21:04, 20 March 2016 (UTC) | |||
== Council of Constantinople of 1170 == | |||
== External links modified == | |||
I am asking here if this page could mention, even briefly the 1170 synod held at Constantinople. It is listed in John McClintock and James Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature (where it is listed as a council of 1168 or 1170). According to them, the synod was "attended by many Eastern and Western bishops on the reunion of the Eastern and Latin Churches" (Volume 2, 1883, p. 491), and elsewhere they list this same council as being that at which "the Greek Church was entirely separated from the Roman" (Supplement Volume 2, 1887, p. 89). Horace Kinder Mann, quotes Macarius of Ancyra as saying the following about the council: | |||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
"The emperor, the council, and the whole senate gave their vote in favour of a total separation from the Pope... But it was not thought proper to consign (the Latins) a great and distinguished nation, to formal anathema, like other heresies, even while repudiating union and communion with them." (Nicholas Breakspear (Hadrian IV.) A.D. 1154-1159 The Only English Pope, p. 88) | |||
I have just modified {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.monachos.net/content/patristics/patristictexts/34-patrtexts/152-ephesus-definition-nicaea | |||
I had added a brief entry on it, but it was deleted. I am sincerely wondering why it was deleted. | |||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}). | |||
The Council was called by the Emperor Manuel and envoys of Pope Alexander III met in Constantinople along with Patriarch Michael III Anchialus. The Pope required that in all matters the Greeks adopt Latin practices and consent to the papal primacy, and so the Patriarch broke communion with Rome. Further information can easily be found online. | |||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false}} | |||
You can verify the quote by Macarius of Ancyra here: | |||
Cheers.—]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">]:Online</sub></small> 23:43, 13 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Nicholas_Breakspear/xLY-AAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=horace+kinder+mann+nicholas+breakspear&printsec=frontcover <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 11:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== |
== The Map is Wrong == | ||
The |
The map at the top of the article shows many areas Catholic that were not in 1045. Lithuania, for example, was not, nor was Pomerania, nor what later became East Prussia. ] (]) 18:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC) | ||
:They would have called it "Pascha" in Greek (Πάσχα) and Latin, which was the same word used for the (Jewish) Passover. And which was translated as "Easter" in English (and similarly in other Germanic languages) for various reasons. (As a side note, modern Greek, modern Latin, and modern Romance languages still call it "Pascha" or a similar translation (Spanish is ''Pascua'' for example).) So this is not at all anachronistic. ] (] | ]) 07:08, 25 July 2016 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 14:19, 26 September 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the East–West Schism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about East–West Schism. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about East–West Schism at the Reference desk. |
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on December 7, 2005. |
This level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
|
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Section on Hell
I significantly modified this section as it relates to Eastern Orthodoxy, since it contained blatant errors such as claiming that the Orthodox believe there "is no hell," and made sweeping generalizations and universal, doctrinal claims on behalf of Orthodoxy as a whole, when even the Misplaced Pages article on hell, in the Orthodox subsection, clearly states and explains the variety of opinion in this area, and the lack of a single, official doctrine, as is found in Catholicism.
67.42.97.177 (talk) 10:06, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
- There is no reference to Hell in the Orthodox Liturgy or the Latin Mass, unlike with the Lutheran Liturgy and Eucharist of the Church of England. I am also uncertain as to whether there is a concept of eternal punishment in the Orthodox Church as God is stated in the Liturgy to be all loving, merciful and forgiving. Perhaps a reference is needed or possibly a different wording where it is presently stated that "there is damnation or punishment in eternity for the rejection of God's grace". Not being graced by the presence of God does not necessarily imply one is punished or damned by God. There is a good presentation in the Orthodox wiki: https://el.orthodoxwiki.org/Κόλαση - that the distancing from God's grace is a voluntary choice and not a punishment imposed by God as is made clear by a cited quote from St John of Damascus: "Και τούτο ειδέναι δει, ότι ο Θεός ου κολάζει τινά εν τω μελλόντι αλλ' έκαστος εαυτόν δεκτικόν ποιεί της μετοχής του Θεού. Εστίν η μεν μετοχή του Θεού τρυφή, η δε αμεθεξία αυτού κόλασις" - God does not punish but each one decides on his receiving of God, whose reception is joy and his absence a Hell. I am inclined to slightly change the current text to better reflect the Orthodox Christian view that God does not punish. Skamnelis (talk) 17:33, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- My comments on Hell which were backed up by references, were reverted by another editor, even though I had added this comment in the talk section several weeks before making the change and the change had remained for a year without discussion in the talk section. Unless I receive a good explanation I will refer the issue to the arbitration committee. Please explain.Skamnelis (talk) 18:34, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Reason and Orthodoxy
The statement that "Eastern Orthodox theologians argue that the mind (reason, rationality) is the focus of Western theology, whereas, in Eastern theology, the mind must be put in the heart, so they are united into what is called nous; this unity as heart is the focus of Eastern Orthodox Christianity" is based on a reference by the American Romanian Carpathian Church. I am not sure this interpretation (and the entire paragraph that follows it) is representative. Of course, it is in the nature of the Orthodox tradition that there are differences in interpretation of the sacred texts because their meaning depends somewhat on the education and understanding of the individual. However, the contrary position has many defendants: The opening of the Gospel of St John quotes Heraclitus: In the arche (first principle) there was Logos ... Through it everything came to be". Heraclitus by Logos meant Reason (in fact that is what the word means in Greek). The translation into Latin as "In the beginning was the Word" certainly does not reflect Heraclitus accurately and rather detracts from the position of Logos (Reason) in Christian thought. St John the Evangelist lived in Ephesus, the city where Heraclitus had lived, and the reference to Heraclitus could not have been accidental. See also https://orthodoxwiki.org/Logos and https://www.orthodox-theology.com/media/PDF/IJOT1-2010/12-popescu-trinity.pdf Skamnelis (talk) 12:57, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Skamnelis: OrthodoxWiki is a WP:SPS so it cannot be used as a source on Misplaced Pages articles. If you have a good source more authoritative than the current one to support the change you want (e.g. Kallistos Ware's The Orthodox Church or The Encyclopedia of Eastern Orthodox Christianity), feel free to use it. Veverve (talk) 19:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- After the response that OrthodoxWiki is a WP:SPS so it cannot be used as a source on Misplaced Pages articles, I had added a reference from Kallistos Ware that seems to have been lost in favour of a statement from a publication attributed to the Romanian Carpathian Church. I do not see why the latter is more representative. At the very least the editor should have opted for presenting the range of views. Unless I have a good explanation, I will refer this issue to the arbitration committee. Skamnelis (talk) 18:47, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:2018 Moscow–Constantinople schism which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Council of Constantinople of 1170
I am asking here if this page could mention, even briefly the 1170 synod held at Constantinople. It is listed in John McClintock and James Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature (where it is listed as a council of 1168 or 1170). According to them, the synod was "attended by many Eastern and Western bishops on the reunion of the Eastern and Latin Churches" (Volume 2, 1883, p. 491), and elsewhere they list this same council as being that at which "the Greek Church was entirely separated from the Roman" (Supplement Volume 2, 1887, p. 89). Horace Kinder Mann, quotes Macarius of Ancyra as saying the following about the council:
"The emperor, the council, and the whole senate gave their vote in favour of a total separation from the Pope... But it was not thought proper to consign (the Latins) a great and distinguished nation, to formal anathema, like other heresies, even while repudiating union and communion with them." (Nicholas Breakspear (Hadrian IV.) A.D. 1154-1159 The Only English Pope, p. 88)
I had added a brief entry on it, but it was deleted. I am sincerely wondering why it was deleted.
The Council was called by the Emperor Manuel and envoys of Pope Alexander III met in Constantinople along with Patriarch Michael III Anchialus. The Pope required that in all matters the Greeks adopt Latin practices and consent to the papal primacy, and so the Patriarch broke communion with Rome. Further information can easily be found online.
You can verify the quote by Macarius of Ancyra here: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Nicholas_Breakspear/xLY-AAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=horace+kinder+mann+nicholas+breakspear&printsec=frontcover — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:201:8E80:A9E0:129C:633E:6D7B:96FC (talk) 11:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
The Map is Wrong
The map at the top of the article shows many areas Catholic that were not in 1045. Lithuania, for example, was not, nor was Pomerania, nor what later became East Prussia. 2604:3D09:2181:BCD0:A8A9:85A7:47C0:2C6F (talk) 18:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Categories:- Selected anniversaries (December 2005)
- B-Class level-4 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-4 vital articles in History
- B-Class vital articles in History
- B-Class Christianity articles
- Top-importance Christianity articles
- B-Class Christian theology articles
- Top-importance Christian theology articles
- Christian theology work group articles
- B-Class Catholicism articles
- Top-importance Catholicism articles
- WikiProject Catholicism articles
- B-Class Eastern Orthodoxy articles
- Top-importance Eastern Orthodoxy articles
- WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- B-Class European history articles
- High-importance European history articles
- All WikiProject European history pages
- B-Class Middle Ages articles
- High-importance Middle Ages articles
- B-Class history articles
- All WikiProject Middle Ages pages
- B-Class Greek articles
- Mid-importance Greek articles
- Byzantine world task force articles
- WikiProject Greece history articles
- All WikiProject Greece pages
- B-Class Religion articles
- Mid-importance Religion articles
- WikiProject Religion articles