A.D. 1054 and Sabbath Observance

[BrightCandle]

It is my understanding that one the principle reasons that led up to the Great Schism in 1054 A.D., was Rome's opposition to the Sabbath. Patriarch Michael Cerularius and his cohorts insisted that the Roman Catholics abandon their gloomy Sabbath fasts. But Pope Leo IX refused to make any change. And insisted that he was the direct successor of Peter, and that his (Pope Leo IX) word was law, and the Great Schism commenced. At what later time in history did the Eastern Church abandon the Sabbath in favor of Rome's worship on Sunday? And what factors led to that compromise with Rome?

 

[Oblio]

At what later time in history did the Eastern Church abandon the Sabbath in favor of Rome's worship on Sunday?

If you read history, you will see that the Apostolic Fathers (IOW 2nd AD) celebrated the Resurrectional feast on Sunday. This does not however mean that they abandonded Christian observance of Saturday worship, or replaced it with Sunday. Check out the writings of St. Justin Martyr and other Early Church Fathers

 

[countrymousenc]

Here are some quotes from the writings of the ante-Nicene Fathers, East and West:

...no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day. Ignatius (c. 105, E), ANF 1.62

Is there any other matter, my [Jewish] friends, in which we Christians are blamed, than this: that we do not live after the Law ... and do not observe Sabbaths, as you do? Justin Martyr (c. 160, E) ANF 1.199

You [a Jew] now have need of a second circumcision, although you glory greatly in the flesh. The new law requires you to keep a perpetual Sabbath. Justin Martyr (c. 160, E) ANF 1.200

There was no need of circumcision before Abraham. Nor was there need of the observance of Sabbaths, or of feasts and sacrifices, before Moses. Accordingly, there is no more need of them now. Justin Martyr (c. 160, E) ANF 1.206

We do not follow the Jews in their peculiarities in regard to food nor in their sacred days. Tertullian (c. 197, W) ANF 3.34

And let this become a rigorous fast, lest we should appear to observe any Sabbath with the Jews. For concerning [their Sabbath], Christ himself, the Lord of the Sabbath, says by His prophets that "His soul hates." In His body, He abolished this Sabbath." Victorinus (c. 280, W) ANF 7.341
~~~

There were other quotes by Tertullian that were not essentially different from the one I included. Clement of Alexandria also mentioned (ANF 2.469) that the seventh day was a sacred day for the Greeks as well as for the Jews (for you history buffs out there. )

These should not be taken as the only things that were said or written by the early Church regarding Sabbath-keeping (or not). These are taken from:

Bercott, David W., ed. A Dictionary of Early Christian Belief: A Reference Guide to More Than 700 Topics Discussed by the Early Church Fathers. Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1998. Topic: Sabbath, pp. 571-572.

 

[BrightCandle]

Dear Friends,

I'm familiar with most of the quotes from early chuch fathers regarding Sabbath/Sunday worship, and realize that sometime during the first or second century, it seems that the celebration of the resurrection of Christ became a popular event along with the ancient celebration of the Sabbath.

The main point of my question, though, is this: If at the time of 1054 A.D., almost around a thousand years after the resurrection of Christ, the celebration of the Sabbath by the Eastern church was significant enough to become a major point of contention with the Western church, that would seem to indicate that there were large numbers of Eastern Christians who were worshipping the Lord on the Sabbath. Now we are living about 1,000 years from the time of the Great Schism, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I have not heard of large numbers of Orthodox believers worshipping on the Sabbath, from my understanding Sunday is the standard time of corporate worship nowadays. So what event, and when did it take place, that led to the Eastern Orthodox Church to fully replace Sabbath worship services with Sunday worship services?

Brooks

 

[visionary]

Do you know what it takes to make a seal? It takes the TITLE, THE AUTHORITY, and THE TERRITORY. Did you know that it is needed for all laws to come to pass to be signed and sealed? Did you know that the Law of God is signed sealed and delivered?

Remember the Sabbath, to keep it holy. ........For in six days the Lord (TITLE) made (THE AUTHORITY) heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is(TERRITORY), and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed (Signed) the sabbath day, and hallowed it (SEALED).

 

[Oblio]

So what event, and when did it take place, that led to the Eastern Orthodox Church to fully replace Sabbath worship services with Sunday worship services?

AFAIK, we still worship on Saturday In fact, Holy Saturday and the upcoming Lazarus Saturday

At the Divine Liturgy of Lazarus Saturday the baptismal verse from Galatians: As many as have been baptizedl into Christ have put on Christ (Gal 3:27) replaces the Thrice-holy Hymn thus indicating the resurrectional character of the celebration, and the fact that Lazarus Saturday was once among the few great baptismal days in the Orthodox Church Year. Because of the resurrection of Lazarus from the dead, Christ was hailed by the masses as the long-expected Messiah-King of Israel. Thus, in fulfillment of the prophecies of the Old Testament, he entered Jenrsalem, the City of the King, riding on the colt of an *** (Zech 9:9; Jn 12:12). The crowds greeted him with brancfies in their hands and called out to him with shouts of praise: Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! The Son of David! The King of Israel! Because of this glorification by the people, the priests and scribes were finally driven "to destroy him, to put him to death" (Lk 19:47; Jn 11:53, 12:10).

from here

The canon song of Matins continues to praise Christ's victory over death by his own death, and uses each of the Old Testamental canticles as a prefigurative image of man's final salvation through Jesus. Here for the first time there emerges the indication that this Sabbath this particular Saturday on which Christ lay dead -- is truly the most blessed seventh day that ever existed. This is the day when Christ rests from his work of recreating the world. This is the day when the Word of God "through whom all things were made" (Jn 1:3) rests as a dead man in the grave, saving the world of his own creation and opening the graves:

This is the most blessed Sabbath on which Christ sleeps, but to rise again on the third day (Kontakion and Oikos).
Again, the canon ends on the final note of the victory of Christ.

Lament not for me, Mother, beholding me in the grave, the son whom you have born in seedless conception, for I will arise and be glorified, and will exalt with glory, unceasingly as God, all those who with faith and love glorify you (Ninth Ode of the Canon).
As more verses of praise are sung, the celebrant again vests fully in his somber vestments and, as the great doxology is chanted, he once more censes the tomb of the Savior. Then, while the congregation with lighted candles continually repeats the song of the Thrice Holy, the faithful -- led by their pastor carrying the Gospel Book with the winding-sheet of Christ held over his head -- go in procession around the outside of the church building. This procession bears witness to the total victory of Christ over the powers of darkness and death. The whole universe is cleansed, redeemed and re stored by the entrance of the Life of the World into death.

from here

are salient Litugical days. If you understand Orthodoxy, and our focus on the Resurrection and the new Creation rather than the old which prefigures it, you will understand why Sabbath worship is no longer the focus of Christians.

Now, if you want to know what event caused Christians to focus on Sunday ...

 

[Oblio]

Do you know what it takes to make a seal? It takes the TITLE, THE AUTHORITY, and THE TERRITORY. Did you know that it is needed for all laws to come to pass to be signed and sealed? Did you know that the Law of God is signed sealed and delivered?

Remember the Sabbath, to keep it holy. ........For in six days the Lord (TITLE) made (THE AUTHORITY) heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is(TERRITORY), and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed (Signed) the sabbath day, and hallowed it (SEALED).

[moderator note]

Welcome to TAW visionary !

As a friendly reminder I would like to mention that you are welcome to ask respectful questions concerning Orthodox Christianity or fellowship amongst us. All of us are more than happy to explain what we believe and why we believe it. However, please understand that you may not debate or attack our beliefs on this forum. Thank you for your understanding and compliance in this matter.

- Chris
Moderator - The Ancient Way: Orthodox Christianity
[/note]

 

[countrymousenc]

Back to the OP:

Brightcandle, I'm only an inquirer (at this point), but I have read everything I've been able to access regarding the schism between the East and Rome, and have never yet come across any mention of sabbath-keeping as a point of contention involved in the schism. According to the Orthodox mission parish I've just begun attending, and the OCA website, the liturgical day begins on what we normally think of as the evening before, so the Orthodox Church begins it's celebration of the Lord's Day on Saturday evening with Vespers. But I can't find any indication that the Eastern Church as a whole ever kept the Jewish sabbath. Perhaps that idea comes from the so-called Apostolic Constitutions (post-Nicene), which I believe are considered at least highly questionable if not spurious.

 

[prodromos]

Something I put together from stuff I had been reading (Early Christian Fathers etc.)

We as Christians, from the earliest days of the church have always held Sunday, the day of resurrection as a holy day and have chosen it as our particular day of worship, setting ourselves apart from the Jews who remain under the Law and worship on the Sabbath, the seventh day of the week. Our Lord¢s resurrection might be considered enough of a reason to change the day on which we meet together to worship God, but it turns out, like all things revealed to us by God, that this day is prefigured in the Old Testament, not as one might think, as the first day of the week, but rather as the eighth day, a new and eternal day where we leave the endless repetitive cycle of seven days and enter into eternity.

Genesis 1:33 - 2:3 states that God had completed his creation in six days and then rested on the seventh. It is readily apparent, however, that God has never stopped creating since each new person who is conceived is a new creation. We did not exist as disembodied souls prior to the beginnings of our life in the womb. We also know that God is spirit and that He is omnipotent and cannot become tired from the work of creation. Tiredness is something of the flesh, not of spirit, so here we begin to understand that the seventh day of rest is something significant for God incarnate, since only flesh needs rest. Like so many other things that are prefigured in the Old Testament we must understand that there is a deeper meaning to the seven days of the Genesis account. They are a type of something in the future, or indeed something outside of our understanding of time entirely.

We have already seen how the Sabbath, the day of rest, is of significance to the God-man, Jesus Chist. We know that through the whole of His incarnation, that is, His conception, His birth, His life of teaching and example culminating in His death and resurrection, Jesus fulfilled all of the Law and the Prophets. So how did He fulfill the Sabbath? It was certainly not through the keeping of the Sabbath on a week to week basis since Jesus continued to work on the Sabbath, healing people and teaching in the synagogues and the temple.

Jesus was crucified on the "sixth day", Friday, He lay in the tomb for the whole of the "seventh day", the Sabbath, then He rose again on the "eighth day", the incorrupt, eternal, and unending day, the day without night following. Thus did Christ fulfill the Sabbath, when His flesh, through death, ceased to do work and so He did rest, having finished all His works of creation and salvation.

It should be noted that the eighth day has particular significance throughout the Old Testament. Male boys were always circumcised on the eighth day after their birth, regardless of whether this broke the Sabbath. We are no longer required to be circumcised, rather we receive circumcision of the heart through entry into the eternal eighth day of the resurrection.

The book of Leviticus has many references to the eighth day, regarding circumcision, sanctification of the altar (seven days of preparation, then its use from the eighth day and onwards). The day on which an offering is brought to the temple after a period on uncleanliness is again, on the eighth day after whatever was causing their uncleanliness had ceased.

In the Septuagint Old Testament, it does not call the first day of creation "first", but "one", "one day", because the first day is a prefiguring of that Sabbath which is the preeminent one of all Sabbaths. It is an image and prefiguring of the day of Resurrection, which is the beginning of the "eighth day", the incorrupt, eternal and unending day. Therefore Genesis names the first day "one day", because it is an image of eternity. The psalmist also refers to the "eighth day" in the superscriptions of psalms 6 and 12, a day which is outside of our seven day cycle of time.

On the Saturday before Pascha (Easter) we read the following in the church service: "Moses the Great prefigured this present day mystically, saying, 'And God blessed the seventh day'. For this is the blessed Sabbath, this is the day of rest, on which the Only-begotten Son of God rested from all His works. Suffering death for the economy of salvation, He kept the Sabbath in the flesh, and returning again... through the Resurrection, He has granted to us eternal life, for He alone is good and the lover of man". (Matins of Great Saturday)

The seventh day is the bridge that connects this corruptible world of the six-day genesis of all things to the incorruptible and eternal world of the eighth day, the day without end, the eternal day. It is the day on which God "rested from all His works" in death for the economy of salvation. It is day of the Great Sabbath, the sanctified one, on which the Lord finished all His works, those of creation and those of salvation. And having completed His union with creation, even unto death, on the Cross He uttered those last words: "It is finished", and He abode in the grave, "in the flesh, keeping the Sabbath". This is the blessed Sabbath that brought forth all of creation from corruptibility to incorruptibility and, "through the Resurrection, granted to us eternal life".

"And the heavens and the earth were finished, and the whole world of them. And God finished on the sixth day His works which He made. And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He ceased from all his works, which God began to do". (Gen. 2:1-3)

Sunday is the day of the sun, the source of life, the first day of the week, and symbolically the first day of creation. It is also the eighth day, the day of the new creation, the day of resurrection, which initiated all creation to eternal life. The importance of this day to Christians was so great that they changed the name of the day to Kyriaki (of or pertaining to the Lord). The Christians in Russia named this day the Russian word for "Resurrection". In fact it seems that only in the West have the days of the week retained their pagan origins, being named after the Sun and the planets which were once thought by the pagans to be gods.

Ezekiel 43:27-44:4 "And when they have completed these days, then from the eighth day onward the priests shall offer upon the altar your burnt offerings and your peace offerings; and I will accept you, says the Lord God."

We do not transgress the Fourth Commandment when we observe Sunday, the eighth day, the day which prefigures the "new creation," since formerly, before the Incarnation, the primordial perfection of the creation of the world was commemorated by the Sabbath day of rest. By observing Sunday, we confess the new creation in Jesus Christ, which is of greater import and more real than the existing creation which yet bears the wounds of sin.

 

[Oblio]

Thank you John

 

[OrthodoxTexan]

Nice post Forerunner. Very edifying.

have never yet come across any mention of sabbath-keeping as a point of contention involved in the schism.

I agree countrymouse. I think the basic premise of the OP and succeeding post is flawed. I have never read anything about a contention over the Sabbath being a principle, or even secondary reason for the schism.

 

[Oblio]

Brightcandle,

Could you possibly be confusing the debate over fasting on Saturdays with worship on the Sabbath. Even so, the Church has always been resurrectional in its emphasis --- as Justin Martyr said, the Church has always met on “the first day of the week.”

 

[BrightCandle]

Nice post Forerunner. Very edifying.

I agree countrymouse. I think the basic premise of the OP and succeeding post is flawed. I have never read anything about a contention over the Sabbath being a principle, or even secondary reason for the schism.

Copied below are some interesting references regarding the Sabbath (referred to as Saturday in the article) and the Schism of 1054, and some historical quotes regarding Sabbath keeping in the east in the first 1,000 years.


Michael Cærularius
(Keroulários).

Patriarch of Constantinople (1043-58), author of the second and final schism of the Byzantine Church, date of birth unknown; d. 1058.

Suddenly, after no kind of provocation, in the midst of what John Beccus describes as "perfect peace" between the two Churches (L. Allatius, "Græcia orthod.", I, 37), Cærularius sent a declaration of war against the pope and the Latins. His agent was Leo, Metropolitan of Achrida in Bulgaria. In 1053 this latter sent a letter to Bishop John of Tranum in Apulia, complaining of certain Latin customs, especially fasting on Saturday and the use of azyme (unleavened) bread for the Holy Eucharist. He says that the letter is meant for "all the bishops of the Franks and for the most venerable pope" (published by Will, "Acta et scripta", 56-60). There is no doubt that it was dictated by Cærularius. John of Tranum sent the letter on to Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida, who translated it and showed it to the pope. Cærularius then sent to the other patriarchs a treatise written by Nicetas Pectoratus (Niketas Stethatos in Greek), a monk of Studion, against azyme bread, fasting on Saturday, and celibacy.

Note the above partial article was copied from the Catholic Encyclopedia, the complete article can be found at the URL listed below.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10273a.htm

Here are some interesting historical quotes verifying Sabbath keeping as late as the 11th century in the eastern churches.

5th Century

Christendom
"For although almost all churches throughout The World celebrated the sacred mysteries (the Lord's Supper) on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Allexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, refuse to do this." The footnote which accompanies the foregoing quotation explains the use of the word "Sabbath." It says: "That is, upon the Saturday. It should be observed, that Sunday is never called "the Sabbath' by the ancient Fathers and historians." Socrates, "Ecclestical History," Book 5, chap. 22, p. 289.

Constantinople
"The people of Constantinople, and almost everywhere, assemble together on the Sabbath, as well as on the first day of the week, which custom is never observed at Rome or at Alexandria." Socrates, "Ecclesiastical History," Book 7, chap.19.

9th Century

Constantinople
(Photuus, Patriarch of Constantinople {in counter- synod that deposed Nicolas}, thus accused Papacy). Against the canons, they induced the Bulgarians to fast on the Sabbath." Photius, vonKard, Hergenrother, 1, 643

Note: The Papacy tried to bring the seventh-day Sabbath into disrepute by insisting that all should fast on that day. In this manner (she sought to turn people towards Sunday, the first day, the day that Rome had adopted.

Bulgaria
"Bulgariain the early season of its evangelization had been taught that no work should be performed on the Sabbath." Responsa Nicolai Papae I and Con-Consulta Bulllllgarorum, Responsum 10, found in Mansi, Sacrorum Concilorum Nova et Amplissima Colectio, Vol.15; p. 406; also Hefele, Conciliengeschicte, Vol.4, sec. 478


(Pope Nicholas I, in answer to letter from Bogaris, ruling prince of Bulgaria.) "Ques. 6-Bathing is allowed on Sunday. Ques. 10-One is to cease from work on Sunday, but not also on the Sabbath." Hefele, 4,346- 352, sec. 478

The Bulgarians had been accustomed to rest on the Sabbath. Pope Nicholas writes against this practice.

11th Century

Greek Church
"The observance of Saturday is, as everyone knows, the subject of a bitter dispute between the Greeks and the Latins." Neale, "A History of the Holy Eastern Church," Vol 1, p. 731. (Referring to the separation of the Greek Church from the Latin in 1054)

Constantinople
"Because you observe the Sabbath with the Jews and the Lord's Day with us, you seem to imitate with such observance the sect of Nazarenes." Migne, "Patrologia Latina," Vol. 145, p.506; also Hergenroether, "Photius," Vol. 3, p.746. (The Nazarenes were a Christian denomination.)

 

[Iacobus]

Hi BC

One hardly knows where to start here, so I'll begin with two general observations. The first is that you misconstrue the position of the Eastern Church on the Sabbath, both now and in the period before the schism. The second is that you are engaging in prooftexting, but your quotes bear no relation to the point you are trying to make.

The Orthodox Church honors the Sabbath. That honor is why we do not fast on Saturdays. It also explains, for example, why we do not pray the penitential prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian on Saturdays during Lent. Yet to say that we honor the Sabbath is not to say that the Church has ever engaged in Sabbath keeping as suggested by the Adventists.

Instead, the dispute with the west was over the idea of fasting on the Sabbath. Heaven knows, the Eastern Church enthusiastically turns out for a fast at the drop of a hat, but she has always refused to fast on the Sabbath. The West had no such compunction, and this became one of very many sources of disagreement between East and West. This does not -- emphatically not -- mean that the Eastern Church held that Saturday was the day when the faithful gathered for worship in the usual course of things. As Oblio pointed out, there are Saturdays when we worship -- Soul Saturdays, Lazarus Saturday and the incredible services of Great and Holy Saturday come to mind. But our primary day of worship is on Sunday, for all the reason Prodromos pointed out.

When I say that fasting on Saturday was one source of disagreement, I should say that it was a relatively minor one, about on a par with the use of unleavened bread for the Eucharist. The unified Church, I suspect, could have survived those disagreements. Instead, the primary problems involved the filioque, matters of Church governance and especially the role of the Pope.

Indeed, for your New Advent article to say that the rift of 1054 appeared full blown out of a period of "perfect peace" is patently absurd. The schism had been brewing for some centuries. And, the notion that Sabbath keeping was a primary reason the Schism is completely wrong. Sabbath keeping simply was not on the table.

I suggest you forget your proof texts and go back and read the originals. Read some objective histories of the early church and the Schism, such as by Jaroslav Pelikan. You may also want to read a little book called "Thirsting for God in a Land of Shallow Wells", by a former Adventist pastor, Matthew Gallatin.

I was raised 7th Day Adventist, and some members of my family are still in that denomination. I know where you're coming from, and I sympathize with your motives. Unfortunately, the historical and theological underpinnings are faulty.

James

 

[katherine2001]

Another excellent book to read is "The Early Church" by Henry Chadwick, who I believe is Anglican. This is the book that my priest recommended. It covers the history of the Church up to the Great Schism of 1054. As James said, there were several issues involved that caused the Church of Rome to break away from the rest of the Church.

 

[Iacobus]

Yep, Chadwick is a good overview. Another good reference (or references) are the various books by Sir Steven Runciman.

 

[BrightCandle]

JamesB:

Christendom
"For although almost all churches throughout The World celebrated the sacred mysteries (the Lord's Supper) on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Allexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, refuse to do this." The footnote which accompanies the foregoing quotation explains the use of the word "Sabbath." It says: "That is, upon the Saturday. It should be observed, that Sunday is never called "the Sabbath' by the ancient Fathers and historians." Socrates, "Ecclestical History," Book 5, chap. 22, p. 289.

Constantinople
"The people of Constantinople, and almost everywhere, assemble together on the Sabbath, as well as on the first day of the week, which custom is never observed at Rome or at Alexandria." Sozomen, "Ecclesiastical History," Book 7, chap.19.

The two historical quotes above by Socrates and Sozomen are signifcant because of the time the that they wrote them and because of the place that they wrote them from. They show that Christians were worshipping on both Sabbath and Sunday as late as the fifth century, being the fact they spent many years of their lives in Constantinople (see biographical sketches copied below), that is strong evidence for Sabbath keeping in the eastern church. After all wasn't Constantinople the headquarters of the eastern church? Also, please note, that both Sozomen and Socrates were lawyers, or who at least studied law, that should give them added creditibility in your eyes, JamesB. And you being a lawyer, where is the evidence that you have to present? I being an SDA have presented no historical evidence that is not available to all Christians. The fact of the matter is that there is not a lot of original sources still in existence dealing with the issue, but there is enough to get a picture of the situation, if one is willing to do the research.

Regarding the Schism of 1054 A.D., I quoted directly from the Catholic Encyclopedia, granted it is history from the western view, but it still it give a good look at the final cause of the Schism, (I would like to see what the Orthodox Encyclopedia has to say, but I don't know that there is one available). Yes, there were other issues involved that had been subjects of heated debate for centuries, but it is interesting the two issues that led the final seperation were the type of bread used in the Holy Eucharist and how the Sabbath was to be keep. That is significant.





Socrates

A historian of the Early Church, b. at Constantinople towards the end of the fourth century. Nothing is known of his parentage and his early years with the exception of a few details found in his own works. He tells us himself (Hist. eccl., V, xxiv) that he studied under the grammarians Helladius and Ammonius, and from the title of scholasticus which is given to him it has been concluded that he belonged to the legal profession. The greater part of his life was spent in Constantinople, for which reason, as he admits, the affairs of that city occupy such a large part in his works. From the manner in which he speaks of other cities and from his references as an eyewitness to events which happened outside Constantinople, he is credited with having visited other countries in the East. Though a layman he was excellently qualified to recount the history of ecclesiastical affairs. Love of history, especially the history of his own time, and a warm admiration for Eusebius of Cæsarea impelled him to undertake the task in which he was sustained by the urgent solicitation of a certain Theodorus to whom his work is dedicated. His purpose was to continue the work of Eusebius down to his own time; but in order to round out his narrative and to supplement and revise some statements of Eusebius, he began at the year 306, when Constantine was declared emperor. His work ends with the seventeenth consulate of Theodosius the Younger, 439. The division of his history into seven books was based on the imperial succession in the Eastern Empire. The first book embraces events in the reign of Constantine (306-37): the second those in the reign of Constantius (337-60): the third includes the reigns of Julian and Jovian (360-4): the fourth deals with the reign of Valens (364-78): the fifth with that of Theodosius the Great (379-95): the sixth with that of Arcadius (393-408): the seventh with the first thirty-one years of the reign of Theodosius the Younger (408-39).


Salminius Hermias Sozomen

One of the famous historians of the early Church, born at Bethelia, a small town near Gaza in Palestine, in the last quarter of the fourth century; died probably in 447 or 448. What the epithet Salaminius means cannot be determined. The supposition that it had some connection with Salamis in Cyprus has no foundation. On the authority of Sozomen himself ("Hist. eccl.", V, xv) we learn that his grandfather became a Christian through witnessing miracle wrought by St. Hilarion. Through many years of persecution the family remained faithful, and Sozomen thus enjoyed the advantage of being trained in a Christian household. His early education was directed by the monks in his native place. It is impossible to ascertain what curriculum he followed in these monastic schools, but his writings give clear evidence of the thoroughness with which he was grounded in Greek studies. A reference to Berytos has led to the mistaken supposition that he pursued legal studies in the famous law school of that place. Wherever his professional training was acquired, he settled in Constantinople, probably about the beginning of the fifth century, to commence his career as a lawyer. While thus engaged he conceived the project of writing a history of the Church. A preliminary study containing a summary of the history of Christianity from the Ascension to 323 had been lost. He purposed to continue the history of Eusebius, and to deal with the period between 323 and 439. The period actually covered in his work ends at 425. Sozomen dedicated his work (Historia ecclesiastica) to Theodosius the Younger. It is divided into nine books, distributed according to the reigns of Constantine (323-37); III and IV the reigns of his sons (337-61); books V and VI the reigns of Julian, Jovian, Valentinian I, and Valens (361-75); books VII and VIII the reigns of Gratian, Valentinian II, Theodosius I, and Arcadius (375-408). Valentinian II, Theodosius I, and Arcadius (375-408). Book IX deals with the reign of Theodosius the Younger (408-39). As the work of Socrates appeared at the same time as that of Sozomen and dealt with the same subject and the same period, an important question arises as to the relation, if any, which existed between the two authors. There can be no doubt that the work of Socrates antedated that of Sozomen, and that the latter made use of the work of his predecessor. The extent of this dependence cannot be accurately determined. At most it would appear that, while Sozomen used the work of Socrates as a guide, as well in regard to materials as to order, and while at times he did not hesitate to use it as a secondary source, he was, nevertheless, neither an indiscriminate borrower nor a plagiarist. In some matters, however, as in regard to the Novatians, Sozomen is entirely dependent on Socrates. The ninth book, which Sozomen expressly declared would terminate at the year 439, is manifestly incomplete. There is no reason to think that portion of it has been lost. It is more likely that, because of advancing age or some other cause, he was unable to carry the work to the date he had set before himself. Internal evidence points to the fact that Sozomen undertook to write his history about 443, and that what he succeeded in doing was accomplished in a comparatively short time.

 

[Iacobus]

Hi BC

As I read your posts in this thread, I am not sure what your point is precisely. I know it is an essential doctrine of your faith that salvation rises and falls on Sabbath keeping. What you have presented, and what I have said as well, indicates that the Sabbath was indeed honored by the Orthodox, but that it was not the primary day of worship. Both Socrates and Sozomen indeed make mention of worship on Saturday in some, but not all, parts of the Church, but both also make it clear that Sunday worship was the main event, so to speak. The cutting and pasting was impressive, but that bottom line is still clear.

So, are you looking for support in Orthodox history for the Adventist position that Sabbath worship is true worship, a pattern perverted by Roman popes? Your own sources betray you. You seem to be suggesting that for the Orthodox it must have been one or the other. The truth of the matter is that it was both, but that the Sabbath was not the primary focus. Instead, it was the glorious day of Resurrection, Sunday. Taking the royal middle way, the Orthodox in this, and in many other areas, manage to have their cake and eat it too.

Am I wrong? Are we not saying essentially the same thing, but putting a different spin on it? Here are the bare facts of what your sources and mine say:

1. That everywhere in the Church, Sunday is the main day of worship.

2. That practice is more varied vis a vis worship on the Sabbath, but that in many places worship services are held on Saturday as well as on Sunday.

So how does that impact the schism? Well, it didn't, in any meaningful kind of way. Please do more reading on the schism per se, and look elsewhere other than Roman Catholic pages. Much more important than views on the Sabbath were the filoque, papal supremacy, conciliar governance, and later, purgatory, indulgences and the doctrine of papal infallibility that led to the schism, and keep it in existence.

Am I missing your point?

James

 

[MariaRegina]

Hi BC

As I read your posts in this thread, I am not sure what your point is precisely. I know it is an essential doctrine of your faith that salvation rises and falls on Sabbath keeping. What you have presented, and what I have said as well, indicates that the Sabbath was indeed honored by the Orthodox, but that it was not the primary day of worship. Both Socrates and Sozomen indeed make mention of worship on Saturday in some, but not all, parts of the Church, but both also make it clear that Sunday worship was the main event, so to speak. The cutting and pasting was impressive, but that bottom line is still clear.

So, are you looking for support in Orthodox history for the Adventist position that Sabbath worship is true worship, a pattern perverted by Roman popes? Your own sources betray you. You seem to be suggesting that for the Orthodox it must have been one or the other. The truth of the matter is that it was both, but that the Sabbath was not the primary focus. Instead, it was the glorious day of Resurrection, Sunday. Taking the royal middle way, the Orthodox in this, and in many other areas, manage to have their cake and eat it too.

Am I wrong? Are we not saying essentially the same thing, but putting a different spin on it? Here are the bare facts of what your sources and mine say:

1. That everywhere in the Church, Sunday is the main day of worship.

2. That practice is more varied vis a vis worship on the Sabbath, but that in many places worship services are held on Saturday as well as on Sunday.

So how does that impact the schism? Well, it didn't, in any meaningful kind of way. Please do more reading on the schism per se, and look elsewhere other than Roman Catholic pages. Much more important than views on the Sabbath were the filoque, papal supremacy, conciliar governance, and later, purgatory, indulgences and the doctrine of papal infallibility that led to the schism, and keep it in existence.

Am I missing your point?

James

Excellent reply, Reader James!

Here are some blessings for an icon-avatar!

 

[OrthodoxTexan]

Regarding the Schism of 1054 A.D., I quoted directly from the Catholic Encyclopedia, granted it is history from the western view, but it still it give a good look at the final cause of the Schism, (I would like to see what the Orthodox Encyclopedia has to say, but I don't know that there is one available). Yes, there were other issues involved that had been subjects of heated debate for centuries, but it is interesting the two issues that led the final seperation were the type of bread used in the Holy Eucharist and how the Sabbath was to be keep. That is significant.

As JB and others have pointed out, worshipping on the Sabbath and leavened bread were not THE issues that led up to the schism. For an Orthodox perspective on the schism, I suggest Kallistos Wares' treatment of The Great Schism.

Note that there is no indepth discussion of either leavened bread or fasting, because these were not THE issues that led to the final schism. The place of the Pope of Rome and the circumstances leading up to the insertion of the filoque were.