Catholic and Orthodox: Best of both worlds

[ConstantineTG]

As pointed out again and again, whomever you might like to mean by “we”, it is not the Orthodox church.

Why are you so intent to misrepresent our faith and trying to tell us what we should believe in? Is this what this discussion for? C’mon now, you’re just wasting your time. This discussion is so that we can bring out what each side believes in, not to tell others their beliefs are wrong.

You hammering on false things will never make it the truth.

 

[dvdjs]

Why are you so intent to misrepresent our faith and trying to tell us what we should believe in? Is this what this discussion for? C’mon now, you’re just wasting your time. This discussion is so that we can bring out what each side believes in, not to tell others their beliefs are wrong. You hammering on false things will never make it the truth.

Again, I am not sure about who you mean by “us”. But the very serious question is: who is misrepresenting what?

It may be that I am wasting my time, but, I am do not mind spending time trying add facts that illuminate a more complete picture of the Eastern Christianity, and Eastern Orthodoxy, than one limited to contemporary, American perspectives. My people have been involved with Byzantine-Slavonic Christianity arguably from its inception. I have a dog in that hunt. Especially when I see facile judgments about how different the ECCs and EOCs are.

You belong to a jurisdiction that, by 2010 census, has 51% converts - heterogeneously distributed - and 56% convert priests. That’s great - like the early church perhaps, but it hints that its theological stability might also be like the pre-Nicene church. That instability shows up in discussions here over and over again - where, in contrast to Orthodox boards, the EO presence is far more limited to contemporary, American perspectives.

We get a story about the Orthodox view of contraception that is very strict, but turns out to come from contact with a particular priest who is identified on Orthodowiki as a outspoken opponent of the prevailing Orthodox teachings. We get the Romanides, Akzoul, fringe on Original Sin. We get a novel 1980’s view of the last judgment that is discordant with the liturgy on the Sunday of the Last Judgment. We get the anti-Western current that goes so far as to contradict Orthodox tradition - especially, and most sadly, on Mariology. We get the neo-Patristic synthesis, that effectively abolishes some five centuries or more of Orthodox thought, coupled with the conceit of time-invariance of Orthodox teaching. And so on.

I am a friend of numerous cradle Orthodox - including those from families of priests and theologians - who feel estranged from their own church. Yet all of this divisive, modern Orthodoxy has a counter balance within the Orthodoxy. I don’t think that it is a waste of time to present it.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Why are you so intent to misrepresent our faith and trying to tell us what we should believe in? Is this what this discussion for? C’mon now, you’re just wasting your time. This discussion is so that we can bring out what each side believes in, not to tell others their beliefs are wrong.

You hammering on false things will never make it the truth.

One question I have is where can I find an authentic presentation of the teaching of the Eastern Orthodox Church? For example, the Catechism of the Catholic Church provides an authentic presentation of what the Catholic Church teaches. Where is a similar resource for the Eastern Orthodox Church?

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

One question I have is where can I find an authentic presentation of the teaching of the Eastern Orthodox Church? For example, the Catechism of the Catholic Church provides an authentic presentation of what the Catholic Church teaches. Where is a similar resource for the Eastern Orthodox Church?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is so new. It didn’t become available until the 1990s. Before then there had never been a world-wide Catholic book which contained an authentic presentation of what the Catholic Church taught, so how did Catholics know before the 1990s what the Catholic Church taught? I venture to answer that they knew based on what was handed down to them.

The Orthodox Church is a Faith that must be lived to be fully known. It’s through the daily prayers both private and public together with the synaxis of the martyrs and saints that teaches authentic Orthodox Faith. You know, it’s easy for a bank teller to identify a false dollar bill because the bank teller handles authentic money all day every work-day and in the same way it’s easy for an Orthodox Christian to know authentic Orthodoxy because the Orthodox Christian lives the Faith every moment of every day.

There is a saying, I don’t recall which saint said it nor the exact words, but it’s like “we (Orthodox) pray what we believe and believe what we pray”

 

[KathleenGee]

dvdjs

Thanks for your last thoughts. I have been reading Catholic and Orthodox posts and have a vague impression that makes me question where actually people are in Orthodoxy, what ‘brand’ of Orthodoxy, is it dissenting, is it a marginalized or minority position?..just as is evident in Catholic thought.

Every so often you will hear someone at the Vatican give their opinion to the international media and it goes all over the world, but it is not the position of the Church.

There is so much to Orthodoxy to learn. I spend more time here reading…

But I just recall something that happened so many years back. I knew of two married men with families that came together for meals on a regular basis. One father joined an Eastern rite. The two men began to argue, and finally it came to how to correctly say the sign of the cross.

With this disagreement of how to say the sign of the cross with your hand, it was the straw that broke the camel’s back, and they lost their friendship.

 

[JMJ_coder]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is so new. It didn’t become available until the 1990s. Before then there had never been a world-wide Catholic book which contained an authentic presentation of what the Catholic Church taught, so how did Catholics know before the 1990s what the Catholic Church taught? I venture to answer that they knew based on what was handed down to them.

The Orthodox Church is a Faith that must be lived to be fully known. It’s through the daily prayers both private and public together with the synaxis of the martyrs and saints that teaches authentic Orthodox Faith. You know, it’s easy for a bank teller to identify a false dollar bill because the bank teller handles authentic money all day every work-day and in the same way it’s easy for an Orthodox Christian to know authentic Orthodoxy because the Orthodox Christian lives the Faith every moment of every day.

There is a saying, I don’t recall which saint said it nor the exact words, but it’s like “we (Orthodox) pray what we believe and believe what we pray”

The current Catechism was promulgated in 1992. Before that there was the Catechism of Trent. Also, there was the Baltimore Catechism. Currently there is also the U.S. Adult Catechism. In the Byzantine Catholic Church there is a 3 volume catechism called “Light and Life”. Now, some of those catechisms were specific and geared toward a specific segment, such as children in the United States in the case of the Baltimore Catechism.

The Catholic faith is also known by our prayer life and through our action. In the Catholic Church the expression is ‘lex orandi, lex credendi’, which translates roughly to the law of prayer is the law of faith and means essentially what you put forth.

There is a distinction that needs to be made, though. In Latin and the romance languages (like Italian) there are two distinct words for knowledge. One means knowledge like in science. For example, I know that 2 + 2 = 4. The other word means knowledge in an experiential and intimate way. For example, a husband knows his wife in the biblical sense. This second type of knowledge is the type of knowledge that we are ultimately striving to get at in our life of faith. I can know all the theology in the world, but if I don’t know God in this deep, intimate way my intellectual knowledge is of no avail. But, conversely, it is important to know the facts about God to the best of our abilities. As an analogy, if you professed to love your wife but didn’t really care or thought it unimportant to know when her birthday was or what she studied in college would anyone actually take your profession of love seriously?

Therefore, while I agree that ultimately it is important to know God and that mere study is not enough (cf. news.va/en/news/pope-at-mass-we-encounter-the-living-god-through-h), it is still important. For example, how can we love Jesus if we don’t know who he is?

What does this have to do with my original question? I asked for an equivalent of an official catechism because such a teaching document would show me and others an authentic presentation of what the Eastern Orthodox teaches. For example, the Nicene Creed isn’t about experience, but about presenting a factual statement of faith, i.e., we teach this about God.

Now, why do I ask for an official teaching document, e.g., from a Synod of Bishops or from the office of a Patriarch? Because it is a matter of credibility. If you or other Orthodox members say this or that is what the Orthodox Church teaches I don’t know if it is really what the Orthodox Church teaches or if it is just you. I know many who claim to be Catholic but what they claim the Catholic Church teaches is not in fact what is taught. I don’t imagine that the Orthodox Church is without such persons either (in fact, I’ve encountered some before). The citation of an official document would provided the credibility of this is actually what the Orthodox Church teaches. It is the reason that I and many others provide copious citations in our replies. Don’t take our word on it, take this official word for it. That doesn’t mean you don’t disagree with it, but at least you’ll have confidence that what you disagree with (or agree with) is actually what the Catholic Church teaches.

I know this is a little long winded, but does it make sense to anyone but me?

 

[ConstantineTG]

One question I have is where can I find an authentic presentation of the teaching of the Eastern Orthodox Church? For example, the Catechism of the Catholic Church provides an authentic presentation of what the Catholic Church teaches. Where is a similar resource for the Eastern Orthodox Church?

I would say the Church Fathers.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Again, I am not sure about who you mean by “us”. But the very serious question is: who is misrepresenting what?

It may be that I am wasting my time, but, I am do not mind spending time trying add facts that illuminate a more complete picture of the Eastern Christianity, and Eastern Orthodoxy, than one limited to contemporary, American perspectives. My people have been involved with Byzantine-Slavonic Christianity arguably from its inception. I have a dog in that hunt. Especially when I see facile judgments about how different the ECCs and EOCs are.

You belong to a jurisdiction that, by 2010 census, has 51% converts - heterogeneously distributed - and 56% convert priests. That’s great - like the early church perhaps, but it hints that its theological stability might also be like the pre-Nicene church. That instability shows up in discussions here over and over again - where, in contrast to Orthodox boards, the EO presence is far more limited to contemporary, American perspectives.

We get a story about the Orthodox view of contraception that is very strict, but turns out to come from contact with a particular priest who is identified on Orthodowiki as a outspoken opponent of the prevailing Orthodox teachings. We get the Romanides, Akzoul, fringe on Original Sin. We get a novel 1980’s view of the last judgment that is discordant with the liturgy on the Sunday of the Last Judgment. We get the anti-Western current that goes so far as to contradict Orthodox tradition - especially, and most sadly, on Mariology. We get the neo-Patristic synthesis, that effectively abolishes some five centuries or more of Orthodox thought, coupled with the conceit of time-invariance of Orthodox teaching. And so on.

I am a friend of numerous cradle Orthodox - including those from families of priests and theologians - who feel estranged from their own church. Yet all of this divisive, modern Orthodoxy has a counter balance within the Orthodoxy. I don’t think that it is a waste of time to present it.

I think this is what happens when someone who does not live and experience Orthodoxy try to interpret what they see with other people.

 

[dvdjs]

I think this is what happens when someone who does not live and experience Orthodoxy try to interpret what they see with other people.

You think wrong. If I had not experienced and lived Orthodoxy for a many years your comment might have some merit. But as I have mentioned before, my experience is long and deep - not a mere couple of years, btw. Rather than an ad hominem, why not think about the substance?

 

[dvdjs]

There is a saying, I don’t recall which saint said it nor the exact words, but it’s like “we (Orthodox) pray what we believe and believe what we pray”

I think you are referring to the saying: Lex orandi, lex credendi.

 

[dvdjs]

I would say the Church Fathers.

What fraction of the eastern church fathers writings is available in English?

 

[JMJ_coder]

I would say the Church Fathers.

I don’t think that is a good solution in this instance. The Catechism of the Catholic Church copiously cites the Church Fathers, as do the writings of the Popes, Bishops Conferences and Synods and the writings of our Saints. We don’t reject the Church Fathers, we embrace them. Thus, if I read the writings of the Church Fathers I will obviously read them in the light of how the Catholic Church has viewed them all these centuries, but it tells me nothing of how the Orthodox Church views them. We’ve both seen in these forums how the same quote from a Church Father could be seen in almost polar opposites viewpoints from the Catholic and Orthodox side of things. It’s really no different in essence than how a verse from Scripture can have wildly different meanings among different Protestant denominations. So if I asked, say, a Methodist what their official teaching was and they told me to read the Scriptures where would that get me?

 

[dvdjs]

dvdjs

Thanks for your last thoughts. I have been reading Catholic and Orthodox posts and have a vague impression that makes me question where actually people are in Orthodoxy, what ‘brand’ of Orthodoxy, is it dissenting, is it a marginalized or minority position?..just as is evident in Catholic thought.

Every so often you will hear someone at the Vatican give their opinion to the international media and it goes all over the world, but it is not the position of the Church.

I really don’t see anything, yet, that would be akin to, say, a Hans Kung within Orthodoxy - that is an academic school that has is prominent enough and wrong enough to merit public approbation. Were it not for the intervention of the Communist era, this might have happened with Russia: there were string movements for reform and resourcement at the end to the 19th century - some of which are reverberating now. In Greece, at the time of independence, only about 10% of the clergy could write their name. Orthodox theology is now regaining vitality that it had not seen for centuries. There are different schools, with different emphases and perspectives. At the moment, there are few limits and little gathering in. One result is that there is a devolution to a minimal tradition of what “has to be believed”, and an anti-intellectualism I read things here from new neorthodox that are shockingly unfamiliar to someone from the stara krajina. On the other hand there are some areas, like ecumenism, that seem to have developed into hard factions ready to call out heretics.

How will this all shake out? I heard a third generation OCA priest say that a great thing about converts is that there children will be Orthodox. So maybe patience is all that is needed. Or perhaps will there be a lot of passers-by - a few years and out. Here is a discussion among such folk and some hangers on: modestinus.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/hype/ Or worse, IMO: American Eastern Christianity captured by the blame-the-West-first crowd.

PS the link is a good read to destroy the idea that “this is what happens when someone who does not live and experience Orthodoxy try to interpret what they see with other people.”

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

The current Catechism was promulgated in 1992. Before that there was the Catechism of Trent. Also, there was the Baltimore Catechism. Currently there is also the U.S. Adult Catechism. In the Byzantine Catholic Church there is a 3 volume catechism called “Light and Life”. Now, some of those catechisms were specific and geared toward a specific segment, such as children in the United States in the case of the Baltimore Catechism.

The Catholic faith is also known by our prayer life and through our action. In the Catholic Church the expression is ‘lex orandi, lex credendi’, which translates roughly to the law of prayer is the law of faith and means essentially what you put forth.

Your first paragraph confirms my point that the CCC for the entire Catholic Church is a very new and novel thing. The Catechism of Trent was specifically was compiled specificially for the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church. The Baltimore Catechism specifically for the United States Roman Catholics. The Light & Life just for the Byzantine Catholics. But previous to 1992 no world-wide Catholic Catechism, but only local Catechisms. Local to either a specific Rite within the Catholic Church or within a particular country or diocese. Yet, I assume that Catholics had no problem discerning what was authentic Catholic Teaching.

Your second paragraph, I’m not sure you want to apply that saying to Catholic prayers as being the law of faith because some Catholic prayers directly conflict with the teachings of God; for example, in this Catholic prayer: Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit now as it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be world without end. This Catholic prayer directly conflicts with the teaching of Jesus Christ’s own words: Heaven and earth shall pass away…

There is no conflict with Orthodox prayers and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Orthodox prayers, liturgical and private, teach us Orthodox what is authentic and acceptible for belief. It’s through our prayers that we learn Who Jesus Christ is, who the Theotokos is, who the Saints & Martyrs are, who we are, how we are to live and what we are to believe. This is why we have to LIVE our Faith to know what it is because if we don’t live our Faith (if we neglect the daily prayers & readings & weekly Liturgical cycle) then we miss out on learning our Faith.

 

[LionHeart777]

Your first paragraph confirms my point that the CCC for the entire Catholic Church is a very new and novel thing. The Catechism of Trent was specifically was compiled specificially for the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church. The Baltimore Catechism specifically for the United States Roman Catholics. The Light & Life just for the Byzantine Catholics. But previous to 1992 no world-wide Catholic Catechism, but only local Catechisms. Local to either a specific Rite within the Catholic Church or within a particular country or diocese. Yet, I assume that Catholics had no problem discerning what was authentic Catholic Teaching.

Your second paragraph, I’m not sure you want to apply that saying to Catholic prayers as being the law of faith because some Catholic prayers directly conflict with the teachings of God; for example, in this Catholic prayer: Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit now as it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be world without end. This Catholic prayer directly conflicts with the teaching of Jesus Christ’s own words: Heaven and earth shall pass away…

There is no conflict with Orthodox prayers and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Orthodox prayers, liturgical and private, teach us Orthodox what is authentic and acceptible for belief. It’s through our prayers that we learn Who Jesus Christ is, who the Theotokos is, who the Saints & Martyrs are, who we are, how we are to live and what we are to believe. This is why we have to LIVE our Faith to know what it is because if we don’t live our Faith (if we neglect the daily prayers & readings & weekly Liturgical cycle) then we miss out on learning our Faith.

You misunderstand the use of “world without end”. I recommend this old thread discussing it, specifically this post.

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

You misunderstand the use of “world without end”. I recommend this old thread discussing it, specifically this post.

That thread shows some CCC quote that confirm Catholics Do Not teach the world is without end, but the prayer in English does say world without end. It confirms the point that the saying might not be the best one used by Catholics since the Catholic Prayers don’t always convey the teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

[LionHeart777]

That thread shows some CCC quote that confirm Catholics Do Not teach the world is without end, but the prayer in English does say world without end. It confirms the point that the saying might not be the best one used by Catholics since the Catholic Prayers don’t always convey the teachings of the Catholic Church.

I edited my post, did you see the post I recommended? It should clear it up for you. Here it is again.

 

[KathleenGee]

Thanks, dvdjs and read the link.

I would agree that those evangelicals that convert into Orthodoxy think this is the end of Christianity as the link stated…and that they have dealt with fighting Catholicism their entire Christian lives.

And I know of some who began to look at Orthodoxy after the abuses of Vatican II.

Also from a Catholic devotional perspective, when praying ‘world without end’…I also am thinking of God’s creation, we are His creation and He does not want our lives to end but to be with Him in heaven…and in Revelations it states there will be a New Jerusalem…and that is the continuing of the world…just reflections.

Sorry if I ask and miss it on this thread…but what are Orthodox catechisms?

 

[dvdjs]

Thanks, dvdjs and read the link.

I would agree that those evangelicals that convert into Orthodoxy think this is the end of Christianity as the link stated…and that they have dealt with fighting Catholicism their entire Christian lives.

And I know of some who began to look at Orthodoxy after the abuses of Vatican II.

Also from a Catholic devotional perspective, when praying ‘world without end’…I also am thinking of God’s creation, we are His creation and He does not want our lives to end but to be with Him in heaven…and in Revelations it states there will be a New Jerusalem…and that is the continuing of the world…just reflections.

Sorry if I ask and miss it on this thread…but what are Orthodox catechisms?

Orthodox catechisms are just that: Catechism written for and by Orthodox Christians, although they typically lack formal imprimaturs or nihil obstats.

The objection to “world without end” is odd.

1. We are talking about an English translation of a Latin phrase that corresponds very well to the Greek, so this is a translation issue not a theological one.
2. Both the Greek and Latin words carry a meaning of “a period or state of existence” which, while evocative of “age”, is also one of the many definitions of “world”; indeed in the EOC the last line of the Creed in the GOA has “life of the age to come”, while the OCA has “life of the world to come”.
3. The idea of such a “world” - not meaning the “earth”, is probably not really lost on anyone posting on a thread “… Best of both worlds”.
4. The net is full of Protestant writings full of concern over translations of formulae with “aion” conveying the sense of eternity, but I never heard anything like this from Orthodoxy.

 

[Peter_J]

Sorry if I ask and miss it on this thread…but what are Orthodox catechisms?

Orthodox catechisms are just that: Catechism written for and by Orthodox Christians

You took the words out of my mouth.

A side thought: I’ve heard (although I never read the exact statements) that when the CCC came out in the 1990s, one of the criticisms brought against it was: If it’s a catechism why isn’t it in question-and-answer form? In his response, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger pointed out that Luther’s Large Catechism wasn’t in question-and-answer form. (I’ve heard this mentioned in the context of pointing out that Rome and Lutherans aren’t as far apart as people usually imagine; however, in the present context the more relevant point is that, since our approach to Catechisms is largely borrowed from the Lutherans, it’s unsurprising that the Orthodox don’t follow the same approach.)