In mid-July 1054 representatives for the churches of Rome and Constantinople abruptly broke off their discussions and issued reciprocal excommunications. Since then the schism between Catholic and Orthodox Christians has not been resolved in spite of repeated attempts to find a formula for reconciliation.
Modern churchmen no longer consider the original issue on the debates of 1054 to be sufficient cause for separation. Therefore, historians had tended to view the azyme controversy as a pretext invented by an overly ambitious patriarch, Michael Cerularius. And taking bread... reviews all the extand evidence from a non-polemical, non-apologetic perspective to show that the azyme controversy was not instigated by Cerularius. It developed, rather divergent and mutually contradictory theological interpretations
of the origin of the eucharist and the relationship of Christian faith to Jewish tradition.
The author, a member of the Religion faculty at Rugers College, earned degrees from Rutgers and Drew Universities and the Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies (Toronto) and did further studies at louvain and Jerusalem.
Et prenant du pain... représente une analyse exhaustive, ni polémique no apologétique, de la controverse sur le pain azyme liée au schisme de 1054 entre les patriarcats de Rome et de Constantinople. L´auteur prouve que Michel Cérulaire ne fut pas responsable de cette controverse. Celle-ci s´explique à partir des traditions liturgiques et des interprétations théologiques propres à chacune des Eglises. L´auteur est professeur à Rutgers College, New Brunswick (U.S.A.).