By removing Michael Cerularius as Patriarch of Constantinople on July 16, 1054, the "Great Schism" began, dividing Christianity into the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches.
This is further explained below.
<h3>What is Michael cerularius?</h3>
Generally, Between the years 1043 and 1059 A.D., Michael I Cerularius, also known as Keroularios, served as Patriarch of Constantinople. In the 11th century, his disagreements with Pope Leo IX over church customs were a contributing factor in the chain of events that culminated in the Great Schism in 1054.
In conclusion, Michael Cerularius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, was excommunicated on July 16, 1054. This event is considered to be the beginning of the "Great Schism," which resulted in the formation of the two major Christian denominations: Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.
Read more about Michael cerularius
brainly.com/question/11798363
#SPJ1
Answer:a new virus came out it killed many people across the globe.
Explanation:
Answer:
No
Explanation:
The french and the Native Americans were fighting. The british were using advantages that they had over the Natives with no guilt or remorse. They killed mothers, babies, brothers, uncles, and cousins who didn't want anything but to keep their home and their beliefs. It wasn't a war. It was a slaughter. The people didn't deserve that. France didn't actually care about them. They didn't feel that they had enough people, so they took advantage, making promises they didn't plan to keep. To this day they hardly have part of what they had, and people continue to take those few liberties away from them. Had the French won, despite the fact that they were supposed to be on the same side, I'm not sure the Natives would still exist, considering how every time the Natives helped someone, they ended up getting hurt. Thank god some of them made it. What a wonderful group of people. <3
Their first dispute is about the fact that Putnam wants Reverend Parris to investigate signs of witchcraft when the respected Reverend Hale from Beverley arrives. Proctor takes exception to Putnam's instruction, feeling that Putnam is overplaying his hand.
(NOT MINE)
Credibility of the source is checking the degree of authenticity of a source
(You want to know how reliable is this information?)
There are multiple factors that can help to check its credibility:
Is the author of the source trusted?
Is the background of the source safe?
Is it a primary or secondary source?
Have the source become unaccurate or
obsolete due to time?
Is there any motive or signs that the source is biased?
