The East–West Schism called the Great Schism and the Schism of 1054, was the break of communion between what are now the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox churches, which had lasted until the 11th century. The Schism was the culmination of theological and political differences between the Christian East and West which had developed over the preceding centuries. A succession of ecclesiastical differences and theological disputes between the Greek East and Latin West pre-dated the formal rupture that occurred in 1054. Prominent among these were the issues of the procession of the Holy Spirit, whether leavened or unleavened bread should be used in the Eucharist, the Bishop of Rome's claim to universal jurisdiction, the place of the See of Constantinople in relation to the Pentarchy. In 1053, the first step was taken in the process which led to formal schism: the Greek churches in southern Italy were forced either to close or to conform to Latin practices. In retaliation, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Michael I Cerularius ordered the closure of all Latin churches in Constantinople.
In 1054, the papal legate sent by Leo IX travelled to Constantinople for purposes that included refusing to Cerularius the title of "Ecumenical Patriarch" and insisting that he recognize the Pope's claim to be the head of all the churches. The main purpose of the papal legation was to seek help from the Byzantine Emperor in view of the Norman conquest of southern Italy and to deal with recent attacks by Leo of Ohrid against the use of unleavened bread and other Western customs, attacks that had the support of Cerularius. Historian Axel Bayer says the legation was sent in response to two letters, one from the Emperor seeking assistance in arranging a common military campaign by the eastern and western empires against the Normans, the other from Cerularius. On the refusal of Cerularius to accept the demand, the leader of the legation, Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida, O. S. B. Excommunicated him, in return Cerularius excommunicated Humbert and the other legates; this was only the first act in a centuries-long process that became a complete schism.
The validity of the Western legates' act is doubtful, since Pope Leo had died and Cerularius' excommunication applied only to the legates personally. Still, the Church split along doctrinal, linguistic and geographical lines, the fundamental breach has never been healed, with each side sometimes accusing the other of having fallen into heresy and of having initiated the division; the Latin led Crusades, the Massacre of the Latins in 1182, the West's retaliation in the Sacking of Thessalonica in 1185, the capture and pillaging of Constantinople by the Fourth Crusade in 1204, the imposition of Latin patriarchs made reconciliation more difficult. Establishing Latin hierarchies in the Crusader states meant that there were two rival claimants to each of the patriarchal sees of Antioch and Jerusalem, making the existence of schism clear. Several attempts at reconciliation did not bear fruit. In 1965, Pope Paul VI and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Athenagoras I nullified the anathemas of 1054, although this nullification of measures taken against a few individuals was a goodwill gesture and did not constitute any sort of reunion.
Contacts between the two sides continue: every year a delegation from each joins in the other's celebration of its patronal feast, Saints Peter and Paul for Rome and Saint Andrew for Constantinople, there have been a number of visits by the head of each to the other. The efforts of the Ecumenical Patriarchs towards reconciliation with the Catholic Church have been the target of sharp criticism from some fellow Orthodox; the schism between the Western and Eastern Mediterranean Christians resulted from a variety of political and theological factors which transpired over centuries. Historians regard the mutual excommunications of 1054 as the terminal event, it is difficult to agree on an exact date for the event. It may have started as early as the Quartodeciman controversy at the time of Victor of Rome. Orthodox apologists point to this incident as an example of claims by Rome to papal primacy and its rejection by Eastern Churches. Sporadic schisms in the common unions took place under Pope Damasus I in the 5th centuries.
Disputes about theological and other questions led to schisms between the Churches in Rome and Constantinople for 37 years from 482 to 519. Most sources agree that the separation between East and West is evident by the Photian schism for 4 years from 863–867. Apart from Rome in the West, "many major Churches of the East claim to have been founded by the apostles: Antioch by Peter and Paul, Alexandria by Mark, Constantinople by Andrew, Cyprus by Barnabas, Ethiopia by Matthew, India by Thomas, Edessa in eastern Syria by Thaddeus, Armenia by Bartholomew, Georgia by Simon the Zealot." Famous are the seven churches of Asia, mentioned in the opening chapters of the Book of Revelation. While the church at Rome claimed a special authority over the other churches, the extant documents of that era yield "no clear-cut claims to, or recognition, of papal primacy."Towards the end of the 2nd century, the Bishop of Rome, attempted to resolve the Quartodeciman controversy. The question was whether to celebrate Easter concurrently with the Jewish Passover, as Christians in the Roman province of Asia did, or to wait until the following Sunday, as was unanimously decreed by synods held in other Eastern provinces, such as those of Palestine and Pontus, the acts of which were still extant at the time of Eusebius, in Rome.
The pope attempted to excommunicate the church
The Holy Land is an area located between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea that includes the Eastern Bank of the Jordan River. Traditionally, it is synonymous both with the biblical Land of Israel and with the region of Palestine; the term "Holy Land" refers to a territory corresponding to the modern State of Israel, the Palestinian territories, western Jordan, parts of southern Lebanon and of southwestern Syria. Jews and Muslims all regard it as holy. Part of the significance of the land stems from the religious significance of Jerusalem, as the historical region of Jesus' ministry, as the site of the Isra and Mi'raj event of c. 621 CE in Islam. The holiness of the land as a destination of Christian pilgrimage contributed to launching the Crusades, as European Christians sought to win back the Holy Land from the Muslims, who had conquered it from the Christian Byzantine Empire in the 630s. In the 19th century the Holy Land became the subject of diplomatic wrangling as the Holy Places played a role in the Eastern Question which led to the Crimean War of 1853-1856.
Many sites in the Holy Land have long been pilgrimage destinations for adherents of the Abrahamic religions, including Jews, Christians and Bahá'ís. Pilgrims visit the Holy Land to touch and see physical manifestations of their faith, to confirm their beliefs in the holy context with collective excitation, to connect to the Holy Land. Jews do not refer to the Land of Israel as "Holy Land"; the Tanakh explicitly refers to it as "holy land" in only one passage. The term "holy land" is further used twice in the deuterocanonical books; the holiness of the Land of Israel is implied in the Tanakh by the Land being given to the Israelites by God, that is, it is the "promised land", an integral part of God's covenant. In the Torah many mitzvot commanded to the Israelites can only be performed in the Land of Israel, which serves to differentiate it from other lands. For example, in the Land of Israel, "no land shall be sold permanently". Shmita is only observed with respect to the land of Israel, the observance of many holy days is different, as an extra day is observed in the Jewish diaspora.
According to Eliezer Schweid: The uniqueness of the Land of Israel is...'geo-theological' and not climatic. This is the land which faces the entrance of the spiritual world, that sphere of existence that lies beyond the physical world known to us through our senses; this is the key to the land's unique status with regard to prophecy and prayer, with regard to the commandments From the perspective of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia, the holiness of Israel had been concentrated since the sixteenth century for burial, in the "Four Holy Cities": Jerusalem, Hebron and Tiberias - as Judaism's holiest cities. Jerusalem, as the site of the Temple, is considered significant. Sacred burials are still undertaken for diaspora Jews who wish to lie buried in the holy soil of Israel. According to Jewish tradition, Jerusalem is the location of the binding of Isaac; the Hebrew Bible mentions the name "Jerusalem" 669 times because many mitzvot can only be performed within its environs. The name "Zion", which refers to Jerusalem, but sometimes the Land of Israel, appears in the Hebrew Bible 154 times.
The Talmud mentions the religious duty of colonising Israel. So significant in Judaism is the act of purchasing land in Israel, the Talmud allows for the lifting of certain religious restrictions of Sabbath observance to further its acquisition and settlement. Rabbi Johanan said that "Whoever walks four cubits in Eretz Yisrael is guaranteed entrance to the World to Come". A story says. Shammua' and R. Johanan HaSandlar left Israel to study from R. Judah ben Bathyra, they only managed to reach Sidon when "the thought of the sanctity of Palestine overcame their resolution, they shed tears, rent their garments, turned back". Due to the Jewish population being concentrated in Israel, emigration was prevented, which resulted in a limiting of the amount of space available for Jewish learning. However, after suffering persecutions in Israel for centuries after the destruction of the Temple, Rabbis who had found it difficult to retain their position moved to Babylon, which offered them better protection.
Many Jews wanted Israel to be the place in order to be buried there. The sage Rabbi Anan said "To be buried in Israel is like being buried under the altar." The saying "His land will absolve His people" implies that burial in Israel will cause one to be absolved of all one's sins. For Christians, the Land of Israel is considered holy because of its association with the birth, ministry and resurrection of Jesus, whom Christians regard as the Savior or Messiah, because it is the land of the Jewish people. Christian books, including editions of the Bible had maps of the Holy Land. For instance, the Itinerarium Sacrae Scripturae of Heinrich Bünting, a German Protestant pastor, featured such a map, his book was popular, it provided "the most complete available summary of biblical geography and described the geography of the Holy Land by tracing the travels of major figures from the Old and New testaments."As a geographic term, the description "Holy Land" loosely encompasses modern-day Israel, the Palestinian territories, western Jordan and south-western Syria
The Crusades were a series of religious wars sanctioned by the Latin Church in the medieval period. The most known Crusades are the campaigns in the Eastern Mediterranean aimed at recovering the Holy Land from Muslim rule, but the term "Crusades" is applied to other church-sanctioned campaigns; these were fought for a variety of reasons including the suppression of paganism and heresy, the resolution of conflict among rival Roman Catholic groups, or for political and territorial advantage. At the time of the early Crusades the word did not exist, only becoming the leading descriptive term around 1760. In 1095, Pope Urban II called for the First Crusade in a sermon at the Council of Clermont, he encouraged military support for the Byzantine Empire and its Emperor, Alexios I, who needed reinforcements for his conflict with westward migrating Turks colonizing Anatolia. One of Urban's aims was to guarantee pilgrims access to the Eastern Mediterranean holy sites that were under Muslim control but scholars disagree as to whether this was the primary motive for Urban or those who heeded his call.
Urban's strategy may have been to unite the Eastern and Western branches of Christendom, divided since the East–West Schism of 1054 and to establish himself as head of the unified Church. The initial success of the Crusade established the first four Crusader states in the Eastern Mediterranean: the County of Edessa, the Principality of Antioch, the Kingdom of Jerusalem and the County of Tripoli; the enthusiastic response to Urban's preaching from all classes in Western Europe established a precedent for other Crusades. Volunteers became Crusaders by taking a public vow and receiving plenary indulgences from the Church; some were hoping for a mass ascension into heaven at Jerusalem or God's forgiveness for all their sins. Others participated to satisfy feudal obligations, obtain glory and honour or to seek economic and political gain; the two-century attempt to recover the Holy Land ended in failure. Following the First Crusade there were numerous less significant ones. After the last Catholic outposts fell in 1291, there were no more Crusades.
The Wendish Crusade and those of the Archbishop of Bremen brought all the North-East Baltic and the tribes of Mecklenburg and Lusatia under Catholic control in the late 12th century. In the early 13th century the Teutonic Order created a Crusader state in Prussia and the French monarchy used the Albigensian Crusade to extend the kingdom to the Mediterranean Sea; the rise of the Ottoman Empire in the late 14th century prompted a Catholic response which led to further defeats at Nicopolis in 1396 and Varna in 1444. Catholic Europe was in chaos and the final pivot of Christian–Islamic relations was marked by two seismic events: the fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans in 1453 and a final conclusive victory for the Spanish over the Moors with the conquest of Granada in 1492; the idea of Crusading continued, not least in the form of the Knights Hospitaller, until the end of the 18th-century but the focus of Western European interest moved to the New World. Modern historians hold varying opinions of the Crusaders.
To some, their conduct was incongruous with the stated aims and implied moral authority of the papacy, as evidenced by the fact that on occasion the Pope excommunicated Crusaders. Crusaders pillaged as they travelled, their leaders retained control of captured territory instead of returning it to the Byzantines. During the People's Crusade, thousands of Jews were murdered in what is now called the Rhineland massacres. Constantinople was sacked during the Fourth Crusade. However, the Crusades had a profound impact on Western civilisation: Italian city-states gained considerable concessions in return for assisting the Crusaders and established colonies which allowed trade with the eastern markets in the Ottoman period, allowing Genoa and Venice to flourish; the Crusades reinforced a connection between Western Christendom and militarism. The term crusade used in modern historiography at first referred to the wars in the Holy Land beginning in 1095, but the range of events to which the term has been applied has been extended, so that its use can create a misleading impression of coherence regarding the early Crusades.
The term used for the campaign of the First Crusade was iter "journey" or peregrinatio "pilgrimage". The terminology of crusading remained indistinguishable from that of pilgrimage during the 12th century, reflecting the reality of the first century of crusading where not all armed pilgrims fought, not all who fought had taken the cross, it was not until the late 12th to early 13th centuries that a more specific "language of crusading" emerged. Pope Innocent III used the term negotium crucis "affair of the cross" for the Eastern Mediterranean crusade, but was reluctant to apply crusading terminology to the Albigensian crusade; the Song of the Albigensian Crusade from about 1213 contains the first recorded vernacular use of the Occitan crozada. This term was adopted into French as croisade and in English as crusade; the modern spelling crusade dates to c. 1760. Sinibaldo Fieschi used the terms crux transmarina for crusades in Outremer against Muslims and crux cismarina for crusades in Europe against other enemies of the church.
The Crusades in the Holy Land are traditionally counted as nine distinct campaigns, numbered from the First Crusade of 1095–99 to the Ninth Crusade of 1271–72. This conv
Catholic ecumenical councils
Catholic ecumenical councils include 21 councils over a period of some 1900 years. While definitions changed throughout history, in today's Roman Catholic understanding ecumenical councils are assemblies of Patriarchs, residing Bishops, male heads of religious orders and other juridical persons, nominated by the Pope; the purpose of an ecumenical council is to define doctrine, reaffirm truths of the Faith, extirpate heresy. Council decisions, to be valid, are approved by the popes. Participation is limited to these persons. Ecumenical councils are different from provincial councils, where bishops of a Church province or region meet. Episcopal conferences and plenary councils are other bodies, meetings of bishops of one country, nation, or region, such as the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops; this article does not include councils of regional councils. Ecumenical in the Catholic view does not mean that all bishops attended the councils, not the case in Vatican II. Nor does ecumenical imply the participation of or acceptance by all Christian communities and Churches.
Ecumenical refers to "a solemn congregations of the Catholic bishops of the world at the invitation of the Pope to decide on matters of the Church with him". The ecumenical character of the councils of the first millennium was not determined by the intention of those who issued the invitations; the papal approval of the early councils did not have a formal character, characteristic in councils. The Catholic Church did not declare these Councils to be ecumenical; this became theological practice. Different evaluations existed within Christian communities. Not all of the twenty-one councils were always accepted as ecumenical within the Catholic Church. For example, the inclusion of the First Lateran Council and the Council of Basel were disputed. A 1539 book on ecumenical councils by Cardinal Dominicus Jacobazzi excluded them as did other scholars; the first few centuries did not know large-scale ecumenical meetings. There is a sole meeting of the early Christian Church the New Testament period, regarded as a Council and, included in the traditional Catholic reckoning as the first of the Ecumenical Councils, whereas other denominations count the First Council of Nicaea as such.
The Council of Jerusalem or Apostolic Council was held in Jerusalem around AD 50. It is unique among the ancient pre-ecumenical councils in that it is considered by Catholics to be the first Ecumenical Council and by Orthodox to be a prototype and forerunner of the ecumenical councils. Both Catholics and Orthodox regard it as expressing a key part of Christian doctrine and moral teaching; the council decided that Gentile converts to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of the Law of Moses, including the rules concerning circumcision of males. The Council did, arguably retain prohibitions on eating meat sacrificed in pagan rites, on fornication and on idolatry; these decisions are sometimes referred to as the Apostolic Decree. The prime account of the Council is found in Acts of the Apostles chapter 15; these comprised the hierarchs of the undivided Church, excepting the Fourth Council of Constantinople are recognised as Ecumenical Councils by the modern Eastern Orthodox Church. The First Council of Nicaea formulated the original Nicene Creed.
Most the council defined the equality of God the Father and Christ, his son. It taught that Jesus was of the same substance as God the Father and not just similar. By defining the nature of the divinity of Jesus, the council did not rely on the Bible but jointly gave it a binding interpretation; the Council repudiated Arianism. The First Council of Constantinople defined in four canons the Nicene Creed, still used in the Catholic Church. Most it defined the divinity of the Holy Spirit, derived but not defined in the Bible, thus the Council built on the Apostolic Tradition. The council met from May until July 381 during the pontificate of Pope Damasus I and issued four canons; the Council of Ephesus proclaimed the Virgin Mary as the Theotokos. The Council met in seven sessions during the pontificate of Pope Celestine I from June 22 until July 17, 431, it rejected Nestorianism. The Council of Chalcedon defined the two natures of Jesus Christ. “We teach unanimously that the one son, our lord Jesus Christ to be God and human."
It met in 17 sessions from October 8 until November 451 during the pontificate of Pope Leo the Great. It issued 28 canons, the last one defining equality of the bishops of Rome and Constantinople, rejected by the papal delegates and Pope Leo the Great, therefore not binding for the Catholic Church; the Council again dealt with the issue of the two natures of Christ, as monophysitism had spread through Christianity despite the decisions of Chalcedon. The Council met from May 5 until June 2, 553 in eight sessions during the pontificate of Pope Vigilius, imprisoned during the Council by the emperor, it condemned "Three Chapters" of Nestorian writings. Several Catholic provinces refused to accept the Second Council of Constantinople because of the political pressures; the Council repudiated Monothelitism, reaffirmed that Christ, being both human and divine, had both human and divine wills. It met in sixteen sessions from November 7, 680 until September 16, 681; the Council was held during the pontificates of Pope Agatho and Pope Leo II.
It discussed the views
Abaqa Khan, was the second Mongol ruler of the Ilkhanate. The son of Hulagu Khan and Lady Yesünčin, he reigned from 1265 to 1282 and was succeeded by his brother Tekuder. Much of Abaqa's reign was consumed with civil wars in the Mongol Empire, such as those between the Ilkhanate and the northern khanate of the Golden Horde. Abaqa engaged in unsuccessful attempts at military invasion of Syria, including the Second Battle of Homs. Abaqa was born in Mongolia in son of Ilkhanate founder Hulagu Khan. Abaqa himself was Buddhist. A favored son of Hulagu, he was made governor of Turkestan. Hulagu died from illness in 1265. Before his death, he had been negotiating with the Byzantine Emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos to add a daughter of the Byzantine imperial family to Hulagu's number of wives. Michael VIII had selected his illegitimate daughter Maria Palaiologina, dispatched in 1265, escorted by the abbot of Pantokrator monastery, Theodosius de Villehardouin. Historian Steven Runciman relates. Since Hulagu died before she arrived, she was instead married to Abaqa.
He received her hand in marriage. When Hulagu's wife Doquz Khatun died in 1265 as well, the role of spiritual leader transferred to Maria, called "Despina Khatun" by the Mongols, it was Abaqa who decided on the permanent location for the Ilkhanate capital, in the northwestern grasslands that the Mongols preferred. Abaqa took power four months after the death of his father, spent the next several months redistributing fiefs and governorships; some of the coins from Abaqa's era display the Christian cross, bear in Arabic the Christian inscription "In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, only one God". Since Hulagu's reign, the Mongols of the Ilkhanate had been at war with the Mongols of the Golden Horde; this continued into Abaqa's reign, the Golden Horde invaded the Ilkhanate in the Spring after his accession. Part of this was due to an alliance between the Golden Horde and the Egyptian Mamluks, in that the Golden Horde was attempting to distract Abaqa on one front, to keep him from invading Mamluk-held Syria on another.
The hostilities continued until the death of the Golden Horde's khan Berke, in 1267. The Great Khan Kublai attempted to intervene, to stop civil war, due to his influence, the Golden Horde's khan, Möngke Temür did not launch a major invasion of Abaqa's territory. However, Möngke Temür still established an alliance with the Egyptian Mamluk sultan Baibars promising that he would attack Abagha and share any conquered territories. However, at the same time, Möngke Temür sent envoys to congratulate Abagha when the Ilkhan defeated Ghiyas-ud-din Baraq. In 1270, he allowed Mengu-Timur to collect his revenues from workshops in Iran. Ögedei's grandson Kaidu, Batu's grandson Mengu-Timur and Baraq of the Chagatai Khanate formed an alliance against Kublai Khan and Abagha in Talas. They appointed Kaidu a ruler of Central Asia; the Kaidu–Kublai war lasted for a few decades. In 1270, Baraq Khan of the Chagataids tried to annex Iran, which started a new war against Abaqa in the city of Herat, though Abaqa was able to launch a successful defense and defeated Baraq's relative Teguder in Georgia.
In the following year, he retaliated by sending an army against the Chagatai Khanate. They plundered surrounding areas. There were small conflicts between Abagha and Qara'unas under Chagatayd noyans until 1280. Abaqa was one in a long line of Mongol rulers who attempted to secure Western cooperation against the Muslim Mamluks, he corresponded with Pope Clement IV through 1267-1268, sent a Mongol ambassador in 1268, trying to form a Franco-Mongol alliance between his forces, those of the West, those of his father-in-law Michael VIII. He received responses from Rome and from James I of Aragon, though it is unclear if this was what led to James's unsuccessful expedition to Acre in 1269. Abaqa is recorded as having written to the Aragonese king, saying that he was going to send his brother, Aghai, to join it when it arrived in Cilicia. Abaqa sent embassies to Edward I of England, in 1274 sent a Mongol delegation to Pope Gregory X at the Second Council of Lyons, where Abaqa's secretary Rychaldus read a report to the assembly, reminding them of Hulagu's friendliness towards Christians, assuring them that Abaqa planned to drive the Muslims from Syria.
But neither this diplomatic mission, nor two further embassies to Europe in 1276 and 1277, brought any tangible results. Bohemond VI of Antioch, under the influence of his father-in-law Hetoum I of Armenia, had voluntarily submitted to Mongol authority in 1260, while Abaqa's father Hulagu was in power, making Antioch and Tripoli vassal states of the Ilkhanate. In 1268, the Mamluk leader Baibars captured Antioch, Bohemond obtained a truce with Baibars in order to keep from losing Tripoli as well. In response to the fall of Antioch, Edward I of England arrived in Acre in 1271, trying to lead a new Crusade, it was considered a military failure, but Edward was able to secure a truce with the Mamluks before he had to return to England. When Edward arrived in Acre, he had sent an embassy to Abaqa, led by Reginald Rossel, Godefroi of Waus and John of Parker, requesting military assistance from the Mongols. Abaqa was occupied by other conflicts in Turkestan but answered positively to Edward's request, sending 10,000 Mongol horsemen under general Samagar from the occupation army in Seljuk Anatolia, to Syria: "After talking over the matter, we have on our account resolved to send to your aid Cemak
First Council of Lyon
The First Council of Lyon was the thirteenth ecumenical council, as numbered by the Catholic Church, taking place in 1245. The First General Council of Lyon was presided over by Pope Innocent IV. Innocent IV, threatened by Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II, arrived at Lyon on 2 December 1244, early the following year he summoned the Church's bishops to the council that same year; some two hundred and fifty prelates responded including the Latin Patriarchs of Constantinople and Aquileia and 140 bishops. The Latin emperor Baldwin II of Constantinople, Raymond VII, Count of Toulouse, Raymond Bérenger IV, Count of Provence were among those who participated. With Rome under siege by Emperor Frederick II, the pope used the council to excommunicate and depose the emperor with Ad Apostolicae Dignitatis Apicem, as well as the Portuguese King Sancho II; the council directed a new crusade, under the command of Louis IX of France, to reconquer the Holy Land. At the opening, on 28 June, after the singing of the Veni Creator, Innocent IV preached on the subject of the five wounds of the Church and compared them to his own five sorrows: the poor behaviour of both clergy and laity.
At the second session on 5 July, the bishop of Calvi and a Spanish archbishop attacked the emperor's behaviour, in a subsequent session on 17 July, Innocent pronounced the deposition of Frederick. The deposition was signed by one hundred and fifty bishops and the Dominicans and Franciscans were given the responsibility for its publication. However, Innocent IV did not possess; the Council of Lyon promulgated several other purely disciplinary measures: It obliged the Cistercians to pay tithes, It approved the Rule of the Grandmontines, It decided the institution of the Octave of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, It prescribed that cardinals were to wear a red hat, It prepared thirty-eight constitutions which were inserted by Boniface VIII in his Decretals, the most important of which decreed a levy of a twentieth on every benefice for three years for the relief of the Holy Land. Among those attending was the future saint Thomas Cantilupe, made a papal chaplain and given a dispensation to hold his benefices in plurality.
First Council of Lyon
Filioque is a Latin term added to the original Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, and, the subject of great controversy between Eastern and Western Christianity. The Latin term Filioque describes the Holy Spirit as proceeding from the Son. In the Nicene Creed it is translated by the English phrase "and the Son": I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father ⟨and the Son⟩. Who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified.or in Latin: Et in Spiritum Sanctum, Dominum et vivificantem: qui ex Patre ⟨Filioque⟩ procedit Qui cum Patre, et Filio simul adoratur, et cum glorificatur. Whether that term Filioque is included, as well as how it is translated and understood, can have important implications for how one understands the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, central to the majority of Christian churches. For some, the term implies a serious underestimation of the Father's role in the Trinity. Over time, the term became a symbol of conflict between Eastern Christianity and Western Christianity, although there have been attempts at resolving the conflict.
Among the early attempts at harmonization are the works of Maximus the Confessor, who notably was canonised independently by both Eastern and Western churches. The Filioque is included in the form of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed used in most Western Christian churches, first appearing in the 6th century, it was accepted by the popes only in 1014 and is rejected by the Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodox Churches and Church of the East. It is not in the original text of this Creed, attributed to the second ecumenical council, Constantinople I, which says that the Holy Spirit proceeds "from the Father", without additions of any kind, such as "and the Son" or "alone". Differences over this doctrine and the question of papal primacy have been and remain primary causes of schism between the Eastern Orthodox and Western churches; the term has been an ongoing source of conflict between Eastern Christianity and Western Christianity, contributing, in major part, to the East–West Schism of 1054 and proving to be an obstacle to attempts to reunify the two sides.
The controversy referring to the term Filioque involves four separate disagreements: about the term itself about the orthodoxy of the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son, to which the term refers about the legitimacy of inserting the term into the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, about the authority of the pope to define the orthodoxy of the doctrine or to insert the term into the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. Although the disagreement about the doctrine preceded the disagreement about the insertion into the creed, the two disagreements became linked to the third when the pope approved insertion of the term into the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, in the 11th century. Siecienski writes that "Ultimately what was at stake was not only God's trinitarian nature, but the nature of the Church, its teaching authority and the distribution of power among its leaders."Hubert Cunliffe-Jones identifies two opposing Eastern Orthodox opinions about the Filioque: a "liberal" view and a "rigorist" view.
The "liberal" view sees the controversy as being a matter of mutual miscommunication and misunderstanding. In this view, both East and West are at fault for failing to allow for a "plurality of theologies"; each side went astray in considering their theological framework as the only one, doctrinally valid and applicable. Thus, neither side would accept that the dispute was not so much about conflicting dogmas as it was about different theologoumena or theological perspectives. While all Christians must be in agreement on questions of dogma, there is room for diversity in theological approaches. However, this "liberal" view is vehemently opposed by those in Eastern Orthodox Church whom Cunliffe-Jones identifies as holding a "rigorist" view. According to standard Eastern Orthodox position, as pronounced by Photius, Mark of Ephesus and 20th century Eastern Orthodox theologians such as Vladimir Lossky, the Filioque question hinges on fundamental issues of dogma and cannot be dismissed as one of different theologoumena.
Many in the "rigorist" camp consider the Filioque to have resulted in the role of the Holy Spirit being underestimated by the Western Church and thus leading to serious doctrinal error. In a similar vein, Siecienski comments that, although it was common in the 20th century to view the Filioque as just another weapon in the power struggle between Rome and Constantinople and although this was the case, for many involved in the dispute, the theological issues outweighed by far the ecclesiological concerns. According to Siecienski, the deeper question was whether Eastern and Western Christianity had wound up developing "differing and incompatible teachings about the nature of God". Moreover, Siecienski asserts that the question of whether the teachings of East and West were incompatible became secondary to the fact that, starting around the 8th or 9th century, Christians on both sides of the dispute began to believe that the differences were irreconcilable. From the view of the West, the Eastern rejection of the Filioque denied the consubstantiality of the Father and the Son and was thus a form of crypto-Arianism.
In the East, the interpolation of the Filioque seemed to many to be an indication that the West was teaching a "substantially different faith". Si