A summary of St Albans Cathedral's 'The Great Schism of 1054' debate

Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem

On Wednesday evening (July 9th, just one week before the anniversary of the Great Schism on July 16th 1054 CE), I took part in a reenactment (imaginary) of the debate between Cardinal Humbert, the Papal Legate, and Michael Cerularius, the Patriarch of Constantinople that took place in the Alban Room at St Albans Cathedral.

This is a summary of the issues we debated. Firstly, can I thank St Albans Cathedral Adult Education department, and in particular, Isabelle Lepore, for hosting the event, as well as having to battle with a capricious technology. And a special thanks to my fellow thespians, Stephen De Silva, who took the part of Cardinal Humbert and Bishop Rob Gillion, who acted as the Narrator.

A couple of years ago, I organised an imaginary debate on Original Sin, with Stephen playing the part of the British theologian Pelagius, who was against the concept and me as St Augustine, who argued we were all born with inherited sin from Adam and Eve. The success of that evening inspired me to write a script for the theatrical events of the Great Schism of 1054 that took place in the magnificent church, the Hagia Sophia, now a mosque in Istanbul.

On a beautiful summer's evening, there was a good turnout of attendees, who were welcomed with some wonderful Orthodox chants, celebrating the Festival of the Holy Cross, recalling how St Helena, the mother of Constantine the Great, rediscovered the True Cross among other Christian relics. An American Choir from Portland, Oregon, Capella Romana, using special acoustics devices, recreated the sound as it would have been heard in the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople during the Byzantine period.

In an attempt to explain what the issues were that divided the Catholic from the Orthodox Church and outlined what happened in 1054,  I started the evening with a slide show where I explored the timeline of the disputes between Eastern and Western Christianity; and how a confrontation between Cardinal Humbert and Michael Cerularius resulted in a Papal Bull (a document with the Papal Seal), excommunicating Michael and all Eastern Christians, being slapped down on the altar in the Church of the  Hagia Sophia.

As a consequence of this act by Cardinal Humbert, the Christian world has been split between East and West for nearly a thousand years. Called 'The Great Schism of 1054', it marked the formal rupture between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, a division that persists to this day. But what caused this split? Was it purely theological, or were politics and culture also to blame?

The separation between Rome and Constantinople did not happen overnight. Tensions had been building for centuries over theological differences, ecclesiastical authority, and cultural divides between the Latin West and the Greek East. The break in a common language played its part: in the East, Greek predominated and Latin was lost, and in the West, the knowledge of Greek disappeared until its resurgence in the Renaissance.

Here are the major theological issues:

• The Filioque Controversy – The Latin Church had added the phrase "and the Son" (Filioque in Latin) to the Nicene Creed, declaring that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son. The East saw this as a unilateral alteration of a sacred text. As was suggested in a question from a member of the audience, the concern of the Orthodox community was more political than theological. The Pope had no right to alter the Nicene Creed, as it was only an ecumenical council that had the authority to change the Creed.

• Leavened vs. Unleavened Bread – The West used unleavened bread (azymes) for the Eucharist, while the East insisted on leavened bread (artos), viewing the Latin practice as improper. The Latins claimed that unleavened bread was used at the Last Supper (at the time of the Jewish Passover). The Orthodox Church saw leavened bread as a symbol of life and the resurrection of Christ.

• Papal Authority – Probably the most significant dispute was that Rome claimed universal jurisdiction over all Christians, while the East held to a model of "first among equals" for the Pope, with authority shared among patriarchs. The Orthodox Church perceived Ecumenical Councils as the source of authority and accused the Pope of tyranny.

In the background, there were also many other political considerations which drove the Church apart:

• The Rise of the Holy Roman Empire – The coronation of Charlemagne in 800 by the Pope angered Byzantium, which saw itself as the true heir of Rome.

• The Norman Threat – Latin-rite churches in Byzantine-controlled southern Italy were pressured to conform to Greek practices, leading to clashes.

• Mutual Distrust – Linguistic differences, as I have already hinted at (Latin vs. Greek), liturgical variations, and competing claims to Christian primacy deepened the rift.

In July 1054, a papal delegation led by Cardinal Humbert of Siva Candida (a suburb of Rome) arrived in Constantinople to negotiate with Patriarch Michael Cerularius. The talks failed spectacularly, and in a dramatic act, Humbert marched into Hagia Sophia and placed a bull of excommunication (a formal document with Leo IX’s seal but, in fact, illegitimate as the Pope had already died before the Bull could be served) on the altar, condemning the Patriarch and all members of the Eastern Church. Cerularius responded by excommunicating the papal legates in return, so that the Great Schism became permanent, splitting Christianity into the Catholic (West) and Orthodox (East) branches.

There have been various attempts at reconciliation to heal the divide that have been made over the centuries, and in 1965, there was a mutual lifting of anathemas by Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras. The present Pope, Leo XIV, has welcomed an Orthodox delegation to Rome, and has agreed to meet Bartholomew I, the Patriarch of Constantinople, in the autumn at Nicaea (modern Iznik) to celebrate 1700 years of the Nicene Creed.

However, the Schism still remains unresolved, with shared Communion still forbidden due to deep doctrinal and administrative differences.

The division of 1054 shaped European history, influencing the Crusades, the fall of Byzantium, and even modern geopolitics. President Putin argues that Russia, which claimed to be the Third Rome after the Fall of Constantinople in 1453, has a spiritual duty to preserve the Orthodox culture against Western Catholic and Protestant incursions.  Today, as Christianity faces secularisation and internal challenges, the question remains: Can East and West ever fully reunite?

The Great Schism was not merely a historical event but a defining moment for Christianity. While steps toward reconciliation have been made, the theological and cultural divides run deep. Understanding this split is key to grasping the past—and perhaps, the future—of the Christian faith.

The Cathedral debate ended with some splendid questions from the audience (I think the most questions I can personally remember in the Alban Room). I hope those who attended will agree we all learnt much, finishing with a wonderful story, explaining his pectoral cross, from Bishop Rob.

Although our voices are not significant, I think we all felt a sense that we would want the disputes to be put behind Christianity and East and West to come together!

Tim Boatswain 11th July, 2025