Was Photios an Anti‐Latin?: Heresy and Liturgical Variation in the Encyclical to the Eastern Patriarchs

In discussing Epistle 2, most of the attention has been focused on the discussion of the filioque, to the exclusion of Photios’ other liturgical and ecclesiastical comments. While the filioque arguments are now widely seen as an interpolation into the text (though whether by the hand of Photios or another author can be debated), these additional comments are largely glossed over. However, the liturgical comments in Photios’ Ep. 2 are indeed a central point of contention for the Patriarch himself, rather than a scribe or secondary author. Photios’ antagonism towards Latin liturgy is part of a broader cultural conflict between the two halves of medieval Christendom. For Photios, as well as his predecessors and successors, Orthodoxy was increasingly defined as not only a theological issue, but an issue of praxis, and the presence of innovative liturgical practices was indicative of a perverted theology. These sorts of differences would have been especially notable for Greek missionaries to the Bulgars who lived and worked beside, and in opposition to, Latin missionaries in a competition for ecclesiastical hegemony. Ultimately, Photios’ writings against the liturgical practices of the Latins were of considerably greater importance to his contemporaries than the filioque was to his successors, and the implications of Photios’ theology, given his enduring importance to Orthodox Christianity, have the potential to create new flashpoints in contemporary discussions between Orthodox and Western Christians.