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)
page title change proposal
I suggest we put the title of this page to become "Great Schism" instead of "East-West Schism. Great Schism is neutral and more used. Take a look at this ngram: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Great+Schism%2CEast-West+Schism&year_start=1800&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3. Great Schism wins out against East-West Schism by A LOT. JesusChristismySavior777 (talk) 11:47, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Most people have this schism in mind when they say Great Schism. I think they have it as "East-West" to avoid confusion with the Great Western Schism. However, I think people would include "Western" Schism if they intend to refer to the three popes controversy. Most people say Great Schism when referring to the break between Catholicism and Orthodoxy. 2600:1010:B148:D5F2:0:2B:9205:A501 (talk) 20:22, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- why should we prefer a more ambiguous name when this name feels natural enough? D. F. Schmidt (talk) 18:51, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
Primus inter pares ?!= First among equals
in the paragraph immediately preceding the History section, we have this: "The Eastern Orthodox do not hold the Pope of Rome to be the primus inter pares; they teach that the Pope of Rome is first among equals." Are these not the same thing? D. F. Schmidt (talk) 18:53, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
- I agree. I came to the talk page to raise exactly this point. I'm not an expert on the subject, but I believe the literal translation of "primus inter pares" is "first among equals." The nearest footnote does not seem to resolve this to my satisfaction either. I'd love to see an explanation for how these are different in any way other than Latin vs English. I Dieneces I (talk) 18:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)