FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213  
214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   >>   >|  
e people of the West as ignorant and barbarous, and were esteemed by them in turn as mendacious and unmanly. In ecclesiastical matters also the differences were of long standing. These related to questions of jurisdiction between the two patriarchates. Up to the eighth century, the patriarchate of the West included a number of provinces on the eastern side of the Adriatic--Illyricum, Dacia, Macedonia, and Greece. But Leo the Isaurian, who probably foresaw that Italy would ere long cease to form part of his dominions, and was unwilling that these important territories should own spiritual allegiance to one who was not his subject, altered this arrangement, and transferred the jurisdiction over them to the Patriarch of Constantinople. Against this measure the bishops of Rome did not fail to protest, and demands for their restoration were made up to the time of the final schism. A further ecclesiastical question, which in part depended on this, was that of the Church of the Bulgarians. The prince Bogoris had swayed to and fro in his inclinations between the two churches, and had ultimately given his allegiance to that of the East; but the controversy did not end there. According to the ancient territorial arrangement the Danubian provinces were made subject to the archbishopric of Thessalonica, and that city was included within the Western patriarchate; and on this ground Bulgaria was claimed by the Roman see as falling within that area. The matter was several times pressed on the attention of the Greek Church, especially on the occasion of the council held at Constantinople in 879, but in vain. The Eastern prelates replied evasively, saying that to determine the boundaries of dioceses was a matter which belonged to the sovereign. The Emperor, for his part, had good reason for not yielding, for by so doing he would not only have admitted into a neighboring country an agency which would soon have been employed for political purposes to his disadvantage, but would have justified the assumption on which the demand rested, viz., that the pope had a right to claim the provinces which his predecessors had lost. Thus this point of difference also remained open, as a source of irritation between the two churches. But behind these questions another of far greater magnitude was coming into view, that of the papal supremacy. From being in the first instance the head of the Christian church in the old Imperial city, and afterward
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213  
214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
provinces
 

Constantinople

 

Church

 

matter

 

churches

 

jurisdiction

 
arrangement
 
questions
 

subject

 
ecclesiastical

allegiance

 

included

 
patriarchate
 

Emperor

 

sovereign

 

yielding

 

reason

 

prelates

 
occasion
 
council

attention

 

pressed

 
falling
 
determine
 

boundaries

 

dioceses

 

evasively

 
replied
 

Eastern

 

belonged


justified

 

greater

 

magnitude

 

coming

 
source
 

irritation

 
supremacy
 

church

 
Imperial
 

afterward


Christian

 

instance

 

remained

 
difference
 

employed

 

political

 

purposes

 

disadvantage

 

neighboring

 
country