If the Great Schism of 1054 never happened...

B

bbbbbbb

Guest
would we all believe in Orthodox Christianity?

(since the Reformation happened in the Catholic Church I am presuming that under Roman Catholicism the Reformers would still have left)

Quite possibly. I think a more pertinent question might be what would have become of Orthodoxy had Islam not arisen in the seventh century. I enjoy these sorts of what ifs.

In any event, given history as we know it, there were never the level of abuses in Orthodoxy that occured in the Western Church that led to the Reformation.
 
Upvote 0

VivaCristoRey

Active Member
May 30, 2011
234
25
✟469.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
No, we'd all be Catholic :p

After all, if the Oriental Orthodox hadn't split off the Catholic Church (in 451) and the Eastern Orthodox hadn't split off the Catholic Church (in 1054), those people would still be Catholic.

Both "Orthodox" communions claimed that the Catholic Church was no longer orthodox and that they were the true Catholic Church -- the "Orthodox Catholic Church", as they call themselves. They define themselves in opposition to the Catholic Church by calling themselves the Orthodox Catholic Church, just like the Protestants (who protested against the Catholic Church).

Thus, if there was never a split, we would all -- by definition -- be Catholic. Now, whether our theology would be more akin to the Oriental Orthodox (non-Chalcedonian/Monophysite/Miaphysite), Eastern Orthodox (single-procession) or Roman Catholic (double-procession) ~ someone from each of those communions would answer with regards to their own theology since we all believe that we hold the Apostolic Faith and that the other two groups are wrong. Thus, as a Catholic, I would of course believe that we would all hold to the theology of the Hypostatic Union and Double Procession. The Eastern and Oriental Churches which are currently in schism from the Catholic Church would, in this alternative universe, hold the same position as the Eastern and Oriental Catholic Churches currently do.
 
Upvote 0

Incariol

Newbie
Apr 22, 2011
5,710
251
✟7,523.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
*sits down to watch the inevitable duel with popcorn. Making one point.*

They define themselves in opposition to the Catholic Church by calling themselves the Orthodox Catholic Church, just like the Protestants (who protested against the Catholic Church).

Please. No they don't.

No more so then the Roman Catholic Church defines itself in opposition to the Catholic Church by calling itself the Roman Catholic Church.

We all know that such simplistic titles are simply the colloquial names. Both call themselves the "one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church", or something highly similar.
 
Upvote 0

GreekOrthodox

Psalti Chrysostom
Oct 25, 2010
4,121
4,187
Yorktown VA
✟176,292.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
would we all believe in Orthodox Christianity?

(since the Reformation happened in the Catholic Church I am presuming that under Roman Catholicism the Reformers would still have left)

When I was taking a class on the Reformation at Xavier University, the professor, a Jesuit priest, had the opinion that had Luther arrived 100-150 years earlier, that there might now be a Catholic religious order of Lutheran descent.

To be honest, a number of splits may have started as theological issues, but once worldly politics becomes involved, that seems to be the final straw. Two examples might be the Schism of 1054 and the sack of Constantinople in 1204 or Luther's 95 Thesis which threatened the construction of St. Peters. Even here in the US, we have or had church organizations split due to the Civil War such as the Southern Baptist Convention.
 
Upvote 0

E.C.

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2007
13,746
1,267
✟134,199.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
would we all believe in Orthodox Christianity?

(since the Reformation happened in the Catholic Church I am presuming that under Roman Catholicism the Reformers would still have left)
It is probable, yes. After all, the only area in Western Europe which remained Orthodox after the Schism were the British Isles. Why else did the pope send William the Bastard to invade them? Because the Church there was in support of the East and remained Orthodox.
 
Upvote 0

New_Wineskin

Contributor
Jun 26, 2004
11,145
652
Elizabethtown , PA , usa
✟13,854.00
Faith
Non-Denom
would we all believe in Orthodox Christianity?

(since the Reformation happened in the Catholic Church I am presuming that under Roman Catholicism the Reformers would still have left)

No . Eventually , as always , the hierarchy would seek a level of control to create an environment for people to think about questions such as : is this really what the Lord wants for His church ? For me ? Are these people really representative of the Lord ?

Either that or it would take only more time for one or more of the archbishops to seek more power among the others or seperate their domain from the others .

These people are only human - the power that they have causes a lot of temptation .

They showed at the time that they could not humble themselves enough to keep things in place . Today , they still are too proud to make significant strides towards the place they had "at the beginning" ( from their pov ) .
 
Upvote 0
S

SpiritualAntiseptic

Guest
The Reformation was somewhat inevitable given the corruption of many people within the Catholic Church. There are a great number of factors that led to the Reformation- the plague(s), the western schism, the corruption of leaders, temporal and spiritual, the influence of new philosophies, etc. This all might have still taken place without the Great Schism.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
This all might have still taken place without the Great Schism.

Following on bbbb's post, I disagree. I started the thread "Why didn't Luther convert to EO?" The results of which convince me that if Orthodoxy had been maintained, the reformation would've been unnecessary.
 
Upvote 0
S

SpiritualAntiseptic

Guest
Following on bbbb's post, I disagree. I started the thread "Why didn't Luther convert to EO?" The results of which convince me that if Orthodoxy had been maintained, the reformation would've been unnecessary.

Orthodoxy is a rather meaningless term here and it gives that sense that the Catholic Church was like the Eastern Orthodox at one time. That never happened. The Catholic Church didn't leave (eastern) Orthodoxy just as the Orthodox didn't leave (western) Catholicism.

When both sides were in communion there were differences, as there had been since the beginning. Not differences in faith as much as practice.

The reason the east and west became so split had more to do with the fall of the Roman Empire in the west than theology and practice. The Roman Empire did not fall in the 5th Century, despite what people commonly think. It actually survived in the east as the Byzantine Empire. The 'barbarians' took over the west and established different kingdoms. The east believed that Christians should be united under one empire with one spiritual and one temporal leader (a patriarch and a emperor). The west converted the barbarians to Christians and formed different Christian states, which the east didn't like.

As the centuries went on, the west became more powerful and the east was losing it, until around 1000 when both were pretty equal. The split happened because of a fight over how to provide common defense against groups like the Lombards, the pagan tribes and the Persians.

The paradox was that the eastern church favored national churches with their own leaders while the western Church favored a single Church with a ultimate leader... quite the opposite of the original temporal setup.

As far as Luther, had any change in time occurred, we can say that he would never have been born, since the world would be dramatically changed.

We really have no idea what would have happened. It might have been that the Pope would have less influence over the western Church, or had more influence over the east and west. In either case, the Church would still have a lot of power, money and influence. In the west, the result was the Reformation, in the east, the result was communism. Both sides struggled with socialism and peasant revolts and potential ones during the 19th Century.

The world could be socialist by now, or Muslim.
 
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Orthodoxy is a rather meaningless term here and it gives that sense that the Catholic Church was like the Eastern Orthodox at one time.

Well that's certainly not what I intended, but that the abuses forcing the reformation were avoidable.

As far as Luther, had any change in time occurred, we can say that he would never have been born, since the world would be dramatically changed.

I didn't think they had De-Loreans back then? ;)
 
Upvote 0

tulc

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!
May 18, 2002
49,401
18,801
68
✟271,570.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I didn't think they had De-Loreans back then? ;)

Actually, wouldn't they just need one today and someone with a knowledge of how to use it that has a serious liking for Eastern Orthodoxy? :p
tulc(thinks that's the beauty of having a time machine) :cool:
 
Upvote 0

wayseer

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2008
8,226
503
Maryborough, QLD, Australia
✟11,121.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
No, we'd all be Catholic :p

After all, if the Oriental Orthodox hadn't split off the Catholic Church (in 451) and the Eastern Orthodox hadn't split off the Catholic Church (in 1054), those people would still be Catholic.

I think you need to catch up on Church History. Orthodoxy did not 'split off' as you allege in 1054 - the then Western Church decided to go its own way due to a number of factors including the use of the filioque clause all of which was exacerbated by the 4th Crusade which leveled Constantinople.

It was Pope Leo in Serm. II.2: III.3 who articulated the rising tide of authoritarianism that was pervading the Western Church which he preached in Serm. LXXXII.1-3. But is was Valentinian III in 445 who stated that 'the whole body' that is, all Bishops, should not 'attempt any unauthorized act contrary to the authority of that See ... to do aught without the authority of the venerable Pope of the Eternal City' (namely, Rome).

The Canons of Chalcedon 451 are revealing - particularly article 28 which recognized EQUAL privileges between (Old) Rome and New Rome (Canons XLI, XLIV, XLVII).

Consequently, there was no council, there was no consensus that supported the seizure of power and authority exercised by Leo. All there was was a unilateral decision by Rome to seize control under the name of the Pope of Rome. The EO have never recognized that seizure.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Deut 5:29

Well-Known Member
Dec 10, 2009
1,395
72
✟2,000.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
would we all believe in Orthodox Christianity?

(since the Reformation happened in the Catholic Church I am presuming that under Roman Catholicism the Reformers would still have left)

God's people never got involved in either one of them.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums