W
Wesley7
Guest
Are there enough differences to where you have choose one or the other? . . Can you explain why you’re Roman Catholic and not Eastern Orthodox.
- Status
W
Wesley7
Guest
Why do I have to choose between the Catholic religion and Orthodoxy?
F
followingtheway
Guest
I’ll help you out with the differences…
*]Roman Catholics believe in the “Filioque” which teaches that God the Holy Spirit proceeds from the God the Father and God the Son. Eastern Orthodox Christians believe that God the Holy Spirit proceeds from the God the Father but not God the son.
*]Roman Catholics believe in the “Immaculate Conception” which teaches that the virgin Mary was born without the Original sin, that is the sin of Adam and Eve, the first people. Eastern Orthodox Christians do not agree with the Catholic belief on “Original Sin” and believe that Mary could sin but she did not.
*]Roman Catholics believe Mary went straight up to Heaven, body and soul. Eastern Orthodox Christians believe Mary died but her soul was received by Jesus Christ and only her soul went up to Heaven and three days later, her body went up to Heaven.
*]Roman Catholics often use 3 dimensional statues and venerate (honor) the people who the statues are of. Eastern Orthodox Christians only use icons, and venerate (honor) the people who the icons are of.
*]Roman Catholics believe people who are free of sin go to Heaven. People who die with venial (small) sin or the punishment due to sin go to Purgatory and are purified before entering into Heaven. People who die in mortal (big) sin go to Hell. Eastern Orthodox Christians believe all people go to Hades when they die (though there are some exceptions such as Jesus and Mary), and at the end of time, good people go to Heaven and bad people go to Hell. There are two parts of Hades, Abraham’s Bosom for good people and Tartarus for bad.
*]Roman Catholics believe that in Hell, people are eternally separated from God. Eastern Orthodox Christians however believe that Hell and Heaven are in the same realm, and that they are both in God’s presence, and that there is no separation from God.
*]Roman Catholics celebrate Christmas on December 25th. Eastern Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas on January 7th
*]Roman Catholics believe Jesus Christ died to appease the wrath of God the father brought upon by the sin of Adam and of humanity. Eastern Orthodox Christians believe that Jesus Christ by the cross was united with humanity in all its suffering and took upon the suffering of sin rather taking upon the wrath of God the father.
*]Roman Catholic priests can not marry (except for Eastern Catholics). They are not requited to have a beard. Eastern Orthodox Priests are allowed to marry except bishops. They always have beards.
*]Roman Catholics kneel when they are in Church. Eastern Orthodox Christians do not kneel at Church.
*]Roman Catholics believe that the Sacraments are effective on account of the priest who acts "in the person of Christ” and they believe that Christ works through that Priest. Eastern Orthodox Christians teach that their material elements (bread, wine, water, chrism, etc.) become grace-filled by the calling of the Holy Spirit (epiklesis).
*]Roman Catholic “Confirmation” is separated from the Baptism and is performed by the bishop and not the priest. Eastern Orthodox “Chrismation” is performed with Baptism by a priest who has received “chrism” from the bishop.
God bless :byzsoc:
David
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
I guess the short answer is that while they hold many beliefs in common, they are not in communion, so being affiliated with one group unfortunately precludes you from being a member of the other.
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
Just for accuracy, some Eastern Orthodox Churches on the new calendar do celebrate Christmas on December 25th. Either way (old or new calendar), the date is properly December 25th, it’s just that the Julian calendar is 13 days off from the Gregorian calendar (hence, December 25 on the Julian is January 7th on the Gregorian). The other thing is that kneeling does happen in Church, but properly, it should not happen on Sunday.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Cultural differences in the liturgies, but always the “divine liturgy” conducted distinguished by rites.
All bishops world wide in the Roman Rite are united to the Pope, including the "uniate"Catholic Church communities which conduct the Orthodox Byzantine liturgy.
Eastern Orthodoxy are independent from one another as “autocephalous” church’s.
I thought the feast was Jan.6? when the Orthodox celebrated Christmas? is it Jan.7th?
All bishops world wide in the Roman Rite are united to the Pope, including the "uniate"Catholic Church communities which conduct the Orthodox Byzantine liturgy.
Eastern Orthodoxy are independent from one another as “autocephalous” church’s.
I thought the feast was Jan.6? when the Orthodox celebrated Christmas? is it Jan.7th?
J
jakasaki
Guest
I’m EO and I’m 53 years old.
Since I was born - we have always celebrated Christmas on the 25th of December.
Since I was born - we have always celebrated Christmas on the 25th of December.
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
Independent jurisdictionally, yes, but still unified and in full communion nonetheless. A Bulgarian layman can still commune in a Church in Russia or Serbia, for example.
C
Cider
Guest
Yes, there are enough differences which means we have to choose, since the EO do not share communion with the Catholic Church. Why I am currently Catholic now is complicated and I won’t get into it here but I’m definitely seriously looking East.
Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy is a good book that outlines the differences and is written by an Orthodox priest. There is also a podcast by the same name.
Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy is a good book that outlines the differences and is written by an Orthodox priest. There is also a podcast by the same name.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
There are many Orthodox still not in communion with one another but that is another story;
I would recommend you look into an Orthodox convert to Catholicism before seeking East, just food for thought here are a few of his books.
James Likoudis “Ending the Byzantine Schism”, “Modern Orthodoxy”, “The divine primacy of the bishop of Rome”.
If you have an open mind and think for yourself as does James Likoudis who was once a staunch anti-Catholic look into what opened his eyes to Jesus and Truth.
I don’t know if you studied Orthodoxy’s inception and title name how it came to be since the early ecumenical councils. Heterodoxy comes from these Orthodox Church’s never the Catholic church, which the see of Peter is the only see that has never fallen into heresy as did the other sees.
I don’t agree with you that one “has to” must chose. I don’t find this terminology ecumenical here. But this may deal for another thread why both Catholic/Orthodox share in common in the same one faith, one lord, one baptism.
Peace be with you
M
Marybeloved
Guest
Hello, followingtheway.
Some innacuracies/false implications with the list:
Peace.
Some innacuracies/false implications with the list:
Catholics believe God the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father only, as the principle. The Son is not the source or principle of God the Holy Spirit.
That Mary could sin is nowhere in dispute. This is something you may have picked up from some polemicists who like to present it as a “dispute” in order to falsely imply that Catholics teach that Mary was impeccable or incapable of sin. This is false. Catholicism teaches impeccability only about Christ, not Mary. The Church teaches that the grace received in the Immaculate Conception rendered Mary free of original sin, put her in the same position as Adam and Eve before the fall- Unaffected by fallen nature but definitely **fully **capable of sin.
Do the Orthodox really believe that Our Lady’s body followed her three days later, or that it was discovered to have been assumed (gone to heaven) three days after she was buried and the tomb re-opened? Also, the Catholic doctrine of the assumption says nothing about Mary’s death- Only that both her body and soul (as opposed to her soul only like most saints) were taken to heaven. Many Catholics do believe that she died and soon after both her body and soul were reunited in heaven.
Peace.
M
Marybeloved
Guest
Regarding the actual subject of the thread?
I expect that most people are Catholic or Orthodox because they were raised that way, or somehow found that Church at some point in life and have been at home there, finding no reason to look elsewhere.
The more informed members are in each because they are convinced of the truths of the claims of the Church they belong. They believe their Church is the Church founded by Christ and the fullness of truth.
Peace.
I expect that most people are Catholic or Orthodox because they were raised that way, or somehow found that Church at some point in life and have been at home there, finding no reason to look elsewhere.
The more informed members are in each because they are convinced of the truths of the claims of the Church they belong. They believe their Church is the Church founded by Christ and the fullness of truth.
Peace.
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
There are only two main bodies, the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox both of which are separate communions resulting from different schisms (and yet they share much more in common with each other than either does with the Catholic Church). To present it as if there are “many” is not correct, as all other groups are fringe sort of groups. The charge you make is exactly the same as if somebody were to say that the Pentecostals, Baptists, Evangelicals, Old Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans, and the PNCC are Catholics who are not in communion with Rome.
That may be your opinion, but if one studied the councils without any bias, he would see that all of the major heresies which arose in the East were firmly defeated in the East. To present it as if Rome came to rescue the Easterners every time they made some sort of new heresy is a very warped way to think of things. Arianism, Nestorianism, Monophysitism, Monothelitism, and Iconoclasm all came from the East and yet all were defeated in Councils which were held in the East often without any (or at the most a single digit number of) Latin bishops present. Also, the cases of Popes Vigilius and Honorius (fifth and sixth ecumenical councils) are both examples of the papacy falling into error, so I’m not sure where you get the idea that the See of Peter has never fallen into heresy.
P
Paul_theApostle
Guest
Is any of his writings available to read on the net?
J
JohnVIII
Guest
You meant to say “the Roman Church”, not “the Catholic Church” I’m sure.
Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that when a Roman Pontiff did not teach orthodoxy he was thereafter referred to as an antipope? Also, the main stream Church of Alexandria has not only never had a heretical Patriarch, but everyone of them has been glorified as saints as well! The See of Jerusalem hasn’t done too bad either. As for Constantinople, they got off track with Nestorius, but they didn’t try to call Nestorius and anti-patriarch to try to cover up the error of Nestorius, they just worked threw it and learned from there error an exercised that wonderful principle repentance and returned to an orthodox faith - you know, the same kind of thing that St Peter did when he denied Christ 3 times but then repented.
Everyone should choose the Church that is right for them. Neither East nor West will have a “perfect” church to offer you. If there was such a perfect church the only people that could go to it would have to be perfect, and that would keep their attendance down too low. The true Church is a spiritual thing, and the physical can only be a sacramental representation of the spiritual, nothing more.
S
Swiss_Guy
Guest
Just clarifying a few things.
- God the Holy Spirit “originates” with the Father alone, but since everything the Father has the Son has, the Holy Spirit comes from the Father and Son (I think you know this but this is for people who may get confused).
- Catholics believe Mary could’ve sinned, but chose not to.
- Eastern Catholics and Western Catholics believe in the Dormition of Mary also. It is doctrine and it is mentioned briefly in the Catechism. So there isn’t a difference in regards to that.
- I’m pretty sure Orthodox don’t believe in that.
- I wouldn’t know. But for some reason that doesn’t seem quite right for Orthodox beliefs
. - I thought it was the 6th that Orthodox celebrated it. And I think it actually depends upon where you are in the world .
- I don’t think there is dispute over what Christ died for. He died to save humanity from
sin and death and by his Cross we can all go to heaven. - I like the beard part.
- I think it is more about tradition than difference in sacraments.
H
Hesychios
Guest
M
Marybeloved
Guest
More corrections,
What we are taught in fact is that Our Lord offered a perfect gift of self (sacrifice) as God-man (center and head of humanity), a gift of perfect love to God- And this gift of love can only be repaid with equal love, which God in fact did answer by “pouring” God the Holy Spirit on us and availing unlimited grace to mankind. Love for love- That was the bargain. The one love/gift/sacrifice had these purposes:
This sounds like something from the mouth of a televangelist than a catholic doctrine! Catholics do teach about satisfying the divine justice due to God’s Holiness, or making up for sin- But “Appeasing the wrath of God” is something else.
What we are taught in fact is that Our Lord offered a perfect gift of self (sacrifice) as God-man (center and head of humanity), a gift of perfect love to God- And this gift of love can only be repaid with equal love, which God in fact did answer by “pouring” God the Holy Spirit on us and availing unlimited grace to mankind. Love for love- That was the bargain. The one love/gift/sacrifice had these purposes:
- Mankind, through Christ, offered perfect love/worship to the Creator and father of mankind who deserves it
- By Our Lord’s perfect submission, Adam’s and mankind’s rebellion against our maker was made right- This is the satisfaction of divine justice.
- Jesus’ perfect gift (as God and man) being pleasing to God and worthy of his equal love, was answered and he received the returning gift of God (God himself-The Holy Spirit and grace) on behalf of all mankind and shares it with all who accept it.
H
Hesychios
Guest
On Sundays, but not during the rest of the week. Further, one is not to kneel at all during the Easter season, from Easter Sunday to Pentecost. Christ is Risen! It is time to praise the Lord with great joy.
Interestingly, a prominent western Christian of the second century, Tertullian, had this to say about the practice of kneeling in his day: "“On the Lord’s Day we consider it improper to fast or to kneel; and we also enjoy this freedom from Pascha until Pentecost”
Somehow that changed in the western church since his day.
The canons are very clear about it. Much later that Tertullian, in 325AD at the First Ecumenical Council in Nicea had this instruction for us:
There are some people who kneel down on Sunday and during the Easter season, the fifty days from Easter Sunday to Pentecost Sunday. Therefore, it has pleased the holy Council to decree that people should offer their prayers to the Lord, standing. This is required so that in each diocese (en pase paroikia) everything will be done in harmony (omoiohs).
Canon XX
We do kneel, but not on the days celebrating the resurrection of Christ.
Orthodox also do prostrations, which is kneeling on steroids. One drops to the knees, and presses the forehead into the floor.
http://ocaphoto.oca.org/filetmp/2004/June/116/Detail/DSC_0143.jpg
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQXpagMYfwYpx4K94pBJSFkwCXd9rasygnpSKvVl-BRiSVMDDhbPA
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
.
This is not the thread for this, but for clarification; Cavaradossi quoted "but still unified and in full communion nonetheless And when I corrected your false statement you corrected with Cavaradossi quoted “the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox both of which are separate communions” Your statement “There are only two main bodies” is also debatable and does not relate to the other Eastern Orthodox who are not in communion. Your self correction reveals my point that need not carry on further discussion to this thread “that division does exist among the Orthodox themselves”.
Did you just call other Eastern Byzantine rite Church’s not in communion with one another “Fringe groups”? You mistaken apples to oranges here these are never the same. A disunity among Eastern Orthodox exists between themselves “many church’s” is my charge to your false claim that Eastern Orthodox are “Still unified and in full communion nonetheless”. Please don’t twist my words to correct your false statement.
Again getting off topic here, but let us clarify a few things; The problem I see with your statement is that you are forcing a Present day argument from an Orthodox opinion, that never existed with the full unity with the Popes during the early councils. Your false assumption that the East alone defeated heresy statement never reaches these councils. For one the Catholic church was united to the Popes in the chair of Peter.
Your Eastern Pagan Emperors who ruled over the Orthodox always sought the Popes approval. This is probably why your fabricated history remains in the shadows of the Councils because your Pagan Emperor ruled for your Orthodox church at the approval of the Popes on what the council ruled. But maybe you forgot about your Pagan Emperors approval? thinking the Eastern Church alone without their Emperor who sought the approval of the Popes for any ruling to be practiced in your pagan Emperors domain. Again this is for another thread.
Your argument lacks the political ramifications with your pagan Emperors in the East when it came to council decisions.
We are dealing with differences here. Which reveals you forcing post schism (1054 a.d) Orthodox arguments which never existed during the Early Councils of the church when all were united with the Popes while the Eastern Church was being ruled over by their Pagan Emperors.
Again this subject calls for another thread; Wow Iam impressed that out of the blue Orthodoxy found another pope to teach error? This is new to me? The Greek Pope Honorius who was sympathetic to his Eastern heterodox via mail presented “private” letters with leanings to heterdoxy “AFTER THE POPE HAD BEEN DEAD 40 YEARS LATER”.
This Greek Pope never taught heresy as a pope. As far as his personal leanings whether he liked chocolate ice cream or vanilla, Pope Honorius while he lived never taught heterodoxy. The reason the councils labeled him a heretic so that the Orthodox teaching heterodox can remain heretics along with their private letters from a 40 year old dead pope.
The see of Peter never fell into heresy is not my opinion, but Jesus promise. I only repeat what history records and what many great historical scholars past and present have recorded and proclaim. But this is another thread.
In summary another difference between Catholics in the West and Orthodox is how history is weighed. Try hearing both sides and then read the historical accounts for yourself and weigh them. Hearing a one sided argument never helps.
Peace be with you
- Status