The Greek Schism [pp. 758-774]

T/ic Creek Sc/iisni. 769
is called, of the empire of the west, ror and the Patriarch of Constantinofor both of which they chiefly blamed pie, inviting tliem to the synod, and
the popes. This fedirg made them received a ft~vor~ble answer from the
support without any very close exami- fbrmer. The council was opened at
nation the cause of the bishops of the Lyons on NI ay 7th, 1274. There
impeHsd city. Then the memory of wer five hundred bishops present;
Photius was revered as one of the the pontiff presided in person. It
great names of New Rome. We lasted three months, and six sessions
must add, in conclusion, the universal were held. At the third, the Greek reeffeminacy and corruption which has presentatives appeared. Solemn high
left an indelible stain upon the un- mass was celebrated by the pope,
word~y succcssors of Constantine and at whid~ the Credo was sung in LaTheodosius, and given to their gov- tin and Greek, the Greeks repeating
emment the opprobrious but empha- thrice the words, "Who proceedeth
tic name of the Low Empire. from the Father and the Son." At
But no honest man, much less no the next session were read the letters
d~urd~man, can find in these causes of the Greek emperor and prelates.
any excuse or palliation for schism. Both conta~ned most satisfactory stateNor can such cause be found in the ments of their faith in the primacy of
personal relations of either Photius or the holy see by divine right over the
Cerularius with the holy see, mud~ whole church. The prelates, moreless h~ the earlier history of il~e d~urU~ over, informed his holiness il~at, as
of Constantinople, as the facts col- the Patriarch Joseph had opposed
lected frcm authentic documents re- the union, they had requested him to
lated in these pages, we think, suffi- withdraw into a monastery, to await
ciently show. the result of the council, and that, if
The popular hatred of the Greeks he should refuse to accept it, they
against the Latins was doubtless ag- would depose him and elect another
gravated by the establishment of the patriarch. Then the representatives
Latin empire of Constantinople. Yet of the emperor, and those of the preit was the first sovereign of the re- lates, in the name of their principals,
stored Greek empire that opened ne- solemnly abjured the schism, acknowgotiations for a reunion of the church- ledged the supremacy of the Roes. It is not for us to decide whether man see, and took an oath never
NIid~ael PA~eologus was influenced again to infringe on it. A synodical
by motives of interest or of religion; decree was passed defining the Caprobably both had the~r weight with tholic doctrine on the procession of
him. In answer to his application, the Holy Ghost, condemning those
Pope Clement IV. sent a profession who deny fi~at he proceeds from the
of faith according to the ancient for- Father and the Son, as well as those
mula, promising to call a general who assert that he proceeds from
coundl to cemei~t the union, provided them as from Iwo ~rincz~7cs, not 0,/c
the Greeks would consent beforehand ~4iici~7c. The Greeks were then disto accept and sign this profession. missed with great honor, carrying
Gregory X. did call the council, (A.D. wifl~ them congratulatory letters to
1272) for the triple purpose of the the emperor and the prelates.
union of the churches, aid to the But this union did not last long.
Christi~~s struggling in the Holy Palaeologus did indeed cause Joseph
Land, and the reformation ofdiscipline. to be deposed, and John Veccus to
He sent nunclos to the Greek empe- be elected to the see of Constantino voL. X.-49