“Is Christ Divided?”: On the Nature and Possibility of Ecclesial Schism
John A. Monaco
Abstract
John A. Monaco
Abstract
In discussing the relationship between the Catholic and Orthodox communions, the term “schism” is often used as a way of explaining their separation and breaking of communion. While there is no doubting this estrangement, how can we simultaneously affirm the unity of the Una Sancta while viewing churches as separate entities? In this essay, I engage the thought of three twentieth-century Orthodox theologians—Nicholas Afanasiev, Georges Florovsky, and Philip Sherrard—and explore their understanding of schism. Ultimately, I argue that ecclesial schism is ontologically impossible and suggest that an eschatological approach to the Una Sancta helps solve this paradox.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In discussing the relationship between the Catholic and Orthodox communions, the term “schism” is often used as a way of explaining their separation and breaking of communion. While there is no doubting this estrangement, how can we simultaneously affirm the unity of the Una Sancta while viewing churches as separate entities? In this essay, I engage the thought of three twentieth-century Orthodox theologians—Nicholas Afanasiev, Georges Florovsky, and Philip Sherrard—and explore their understanding of schism. Ultimately, I argue that ecclesial schism is ontologically impossible and suggest that an eschatological approach to the Una Sancta helps solve this paradox.
Key concepts: Schism, Philosophy, Theology, Epistemology, Law, Political science, Politics