\ 69. THE CAUSES OF SEPARATION. 311
action of the Council which, in conformity with a canon of the second (ecumenical Council, put him on a par with the new bishop of Constantinople.
And here we approach the secret of the ultimate separation and incurable antagonism of the churches. It is due chiefly to three causes. The first cause is the politico-ecclesiastical rivalry of the patriarch of Constantinople backed by the Byzantine em pire, and the bishop of Rome in connection with the new Ger man empire. The second cause is the growing centralization and overbearing conduct of the Latin church in and through the
o o
papacy. The third cause is the stationary character of the Greek and the progressive character of the Latin church during the middle ages. The Greek church boasts of the imaginary per fection of her creed. She still produced considerable scholars and divines, as Maximus, John of Damascus, Photius, QEcumenius, and Theophylact, but they mostly confined themselves to the work of epitomizing and systematizing the traditional theology of the Greek fathers, and produced no new ideas, as if all wisdom began and ended with the old oecumenical Councils. She took no interest in the important anthropological and soteriological controversies which agitated the Latin church in the age of St. Augustin, and she continued to occupy the indefinite posi tion of the first centuries on the doctrines of sin and grace. On the other hand she was much distracted and weakened by barren metaphysical controversies on the abstrusest questions of theology and christology; and these quarrels facilitated the rapid progress of Islam, which conquered the lands of the Bible and pressed hard on Constantinople. AVhen the Greek church became stationary, the Latin church began to develop her greatest energy ; she be came the fruitful mother of new and vigorous nations of the North and West of Europe, produced scholastic and mystic theo logy and a new order of civilization, built magnificent cathedrals, discovered a new Continent, invented the art of printing, and with the revival of learning prepared the way for a new era in the history of the world. Thus the Latin daughter outgrew the
312 FOURTH PERIOD. A. D. 590-1041.
Greek mother, and is numerically twice as strong, without count ing the Protestant secession. At the same time the Eastern church still may look forward to a new future among the Slavonic races which she has christianized. What she needs is a revival of the spirit and power of primitive Christianity. . When once the two churches were alienated in spirit and en gaged in an unchristian race for supremacy, all the little doctri nal and ritualistic differences which had existed long before, assumed an undue weight, and were branded as heresies and crimes. The bishop of Rome sees in the Patriarch of Constan tinople an ecclesiastical upstart who owed his power to political influence, not to apostolic origin. The Eastern patriarchs look upon the Pope as an anti-christian usurper and as the first Pro testant. They stigmatize the papal supremacy as " the chief heresy of the latter days, which flourishes now as its predecessor, Arianism, flourished in former days, and which like it, will in like manner be cast down and vanish away." l
§ 70. The Patriarch and the Pope. Photius and Nicolas.
Comp. g 61 (p. 273), the Lit. in \ 67 (p. 304), especially the letters of Photius and Nicolas.
HERGENROTHER : Photius (Regensb. 1867-69, vol. I. 373 sqq.; 505 sqq.; and the second vol.), and his Monumenta Grceca ad Photium ejusque historiam pertinentia (Ratisb. 1869, 181 pages). MILMA^: Hist, of Latin Christianity, Bk.V. Ch. IV. HEFELE IV. 224 sqq.; 384 sqq. ; 436 sqq. The chief documents are also given by GIESELER II. 213 sqq. (Am. ed.)
The doctrinal difference on the procession of the Holy Spirit will be considered in the chapter on the Theological Con troversies. Although it existed before the schism, it assumed a practical importance only in connection with the broader ecclesiastical and political conflict between the patriarch and the pope, between Constantinople and Rome.
The first serious outbreak of this conflict took place after the middle of the ninth century, when Photius and Nicolas, two
1 Encycl. Epistle of the Eastern Patriarchs, 1844, 2 5.