Page 273 - Orthodoxy Zizioulas

T H E G R E AT S C H I S M A N D E A R LY R E U N I O N E F F O R T S
into practice his claim to be not simply one of the five patri-
archs of the Church, primus inter pares, but the bishop holding
universal jurisdiction. Even so, communion between Roman
Catholics and Orthodox was not severed fully or everywhere.
It is therefore possible to conclude that, had the Fourth Cru-
sade never occurred, with all its disastrous consequences for
the Byzantine capital and empire, the schism of 1054 might well
have healed itself. Certainly, one cannot base conclusions on
hypothetical situations, especially when the theological differ-
ences between Orthodox and Roman Catholics had already
become increasingly firm and deep during the preceding cen-
turies. Nevertheless, the significant fact remains that even the
Fourth Crusade, despite all the destruction it wrought upon
ecclesiastical relations, did not entirely obliterate the concept
of a single corpus Christianorum, to which both Roman Catho-
lics and Orthodox still, in some sense, belonged. The unity of
the Church that had prevailed throughout the first Christian
millennium, despite theological differences, continued to re-
main the ideal toward which the now-divided Christian world
still aspired. This explains the repeated attempts at reunion be-
tween the Churches.
The first great official attempt came at the Council of Lyons
in 1274, convoked by Pope Gregory X. Its declared aims were
aid to the Holy Land, reform within the Roman Church, and
union of the Churches. The Byzantine delegation, headed by
Patriarch Germanos III and including Theophanes of Nicaea
and George Akropolites, arrived in June. On the feast of Saints
Peter and Paul, during the liturgy, the Creed was recited in
Greek with the addition of the filioque; it is said that at the mo-
ment those words were spoken, Theophanes of Nicaea did not
part his lips. Soon after, and without theological discussion—
the pope had forbidden such debate—the Byzantine represen-
273