Wounds That Still Bleed: Exploring Church Schis...

Wounds That Still Bleed: Exploring Church Schisms, Ecumenical Bridges, and the Path to Healing

Church history is not just a chronicle of faith and triumph; it's also a stark reminder of division. Schisms, those painful cleavages within the body of Christ, have left enduring scars, shaping theological landscapes and impacting the practical lives of believers for centuries. This post delves into the historical roots and long-term consequences of significant church schisms, exploring their influence on subsequent ecumenical relations and prompting reflection on how we might learn from the past to foster greater unity in the present. We'll explore the less-covered schism of the Armenian Apostolic Church from Chalcedonian Christianity and the Old Catholic split from Rome, examining how these fractures impact the prospects for reconciliation today.

The Armenian Apostolic Church and the Chalcedonian Divide: A Difference in Christology

One of the earliest significant schisms within Christianity stemmed from the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD. While the council sought to clarify the nature of Christ, its definition – affirming Christ as being in two natures, divine and human, united in one person – proved problematic for some. Notably, the Armenian Apostolic Church, which had not been represented at Chalcedon due to ongoing Persian wars, eventually rejected the Chalcedonian Creed.

At the heart of this rejection lay a theological difference centered on Christology. The Armenian Church, along with other Oriental Orthodox Churches (Coptic, Syriac, Ethiopian, and Eritrean Orthodox Churches), held to a Miaphysite understanding of Christ. Miaphysitism emphasizes the unity of Christ’s nature, asserting that after the incarnation, the divine and human natures were united "without confusion, without separation, without alteration" into one composite nature. This contrasted with the Dyophysite position of the Chalcedonian churches, which, as previously noted, emphasized the distinct yet unified existence of two natures in Christ.

This seemingly subtle theological difference had profound and lasting consequences. The Armenian Apostolic Church, alongside other Oriental Orthodox Churches, became separated from the Byzantine (Eastern) Orthodox Church and subsequently the Roman Catholic Church. This division resulted in distinct liturgical practices, hierarchical structures, and theological traditions that evolved independently over centuries. For example, the Armenian liturgy is steeped in ancient traditions, often utilizing ancient Armenian musical forms (Sharakans) and unique vestments, creating a distinct cultural and spiritual identity.

The separation also hindered communication and mutual understanding. Misunderstandings and prejudices arose, fueled by historical and political tensions. The perception of the Miaphysites as "Monophysites" (heretics who believed Christ only possessed one nature, divine) further exacerbated the divide, even though the Oriental Orthodox Churches staunchly rejected this label. The impact of this division can be felt even today in the challenges of inter-Christian dialogue and cooperation in regions with a significant Armenian Apostolic presence.

The Old Catholic Churches: Challenging Papal Infallibility

Fast forward to the 19th century, and another significant schism emerged within Western Christianity: the formation of the Old Catholic Churches. This division stemmed from the First Vatican Council in 1870, which declared the dogma of papal infallibility – the belief that the Pope is infallible when speaking ex cathedra (from the chair) on matters of faith and morals.

A significant minority within the Catholic Church, primarily in German-speaking regions, opposed this declaration. They argued that it lacked historical and theological basis and contradicted the conciliarist tradition, which emphasized the authority of ecumenical councils. These dissenting Catholics, led by prominent theologians and intellectuals, formed independent communities, rejecting the authority of the Pope and maintaining a more traditional Catholic faith, hence the name "Old Catholic."

The Old Catholic Churches share many similarities with the Roman Catholic Church, including a belief in the seven sacraments, the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and the importance of tradition. However, they differ significantly in their understanding of papal authority and their stance on issues such as clerical celibacy (which is optional in many Old Catholic Churches) and the ordination of women (which is practiced in some Old Catholic jurisdictions).

The Old Catholic schism had a profound impact on the ecumenical movement. These churches, due to their commitment to conciliarism and their rejection of papal supremacy, were early participants in ecumenical dialogues and cooperation. They played a significant role in the formation of the World Council of Churches, contributing to the pursuit of Christian unity across denominational lines.

Ecumenical Hopes and Persistent Challenges

Both of these schisms, the Armenian Apostolic and the Old Catholic, highlight the complexities and challenges of the ecumenical movement. While significant progress has been made in fostering understanding and cooperation between different Christian traditions, deep-seated historical and theological divisions continue to pose obstacles.

Theological dialogues, such as those between the Oriental Orthodox Churches and the Eastern Orthodox Churches, have led to a better understanding of each other's theological positions, even resulting in agreed statements on Christology that acknowledge the substantial agreement between the two traditions. These dialogues offer hope for eventual reconciliation, yet practical implementation remains a challenge.

Similarly, while the Roman Catholic Church and the Old Catholic Churches have engaged in dialogue, significant differences remain on the issue of papal authority. The Roman Catholic Church continues to uphold the dogma of papal infallibility, while the Old Catholic Churches maintain their opposition, which remains a significant impediment to full communion.

Furthermore, cultural and political factors often complicate the ecumenical process. Historical grievances, national identities, and geopolitical tensions can hinder reconciliation efforts, even when theological agreements have been reached. The situation in the Middle East, where Christians from various denominations often face persecution, provides a stark reminder of the urgent need for Christian unity, yet these very circumstances can also exacerbate existing divisions.

Learning from the Past, Building for the Future

To overcome these remaining divisions, the Church must learn from its past. This requires a commitment to:

• Humility and Repentance: Acknowledging the sins of the past, including the role that prejudice, power struggles, and misunderstandings have played in perpetuating schisms.
• Open and Honest Dialogue: Engaging in respectful and charitable conversations, seeking to understand the perspectives of others, and being willing to challenge our own assumptions.
• Focus on Shared Values: Identifying common ground and working together on shared concerns, such as social justice, environmental stewardship, and evangelism.
• Practical Cooperation: Engaging in joint projects and initiatives that bring Christians from different denominations together, fostering relationships and building trust.

One example of a promising initiative is the "Global Christian Forum," which brings together leaders from a wide range of Christian traditions, including Pentecostals, Evangelicals, and representatives from the historic churches, to address common challenges and promote mutual understanding. At the local level, collaborative efforts like joint worship services, community outreach programs, and inter-church dialogues can help to bridge divides and build relationships.

A Call to Action

The quest for Christian unity is a long and arduous journey, but it is a journey worth undertaking. What steps can we take, as individuals and as communities, to overcome the remaining divisions within the Church? Share your thoughts and experiences in the comments below. Let's work together to build bridges of understanding and reconciliation, so that the Church can truly be a beacon of unity and hope in a divided world. Let's strive to heal the wounds that still bleed, so that we might experience the fullness of Christ's love and grace together.