Eastern Orthodox view of Catholics?

[prodromos]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Council_of_Constantinople

 

[catherineajt]

Simple,

You appear to be obsessing over this issue.

You are not Orthodox. The church does not know anything about you until you show up at the door asking to be admitted. The bishop will decide, end of story.

No, the fact that you are a Roman Catholic does not entitle you to just walk right in to the Orthodox Faith, you need to approach this humbly, or stay where you are.

When you do ask to become Orthodox, the bishop will decide. Until then cool your jets.

When my family converted to Orthodoxy, the bishop had nothing to do with it. We never talked to the bishop, and as far as I know he was not consulted about whether we could become catechumenates or convert. The priest made the decision–actually I think he was just interested in getting more pledges, because he treated all the converts, once we were chrismated, poorly. After a year of listening to anti-Catholic diatribes (I understand the sack of Constantinople was a horrible thing, but it was a long time ago, can we get past it?) and insinuations that we would never be able to “think like an Orthodox” and being told that our son would NEVER serve at altar…we left. There were many other issues, including the fact that I became aware that the OCA’s administration was falling apart, but we returned to the Catholic church via the Byzantines.

And you know what, it’s funny…I don’t hear anti-Orthodox talks at the Catholid church. The only reference our priest has made is that we are “happily” well-acquainted with the Divine Liturgy. No judging about our conversion, no “tsking” about our decision, nothing. In fact, I have never heard a Catholic say anything negative about the Orthodox Church.

But I’ve heard a lot of Orthodox talking nasty about the Catholic Church. That’s just my personal experience.

 

[Hesychios]

Hello Catherine,
I am sorry you had such a bad experience.

I am not saying that you actually did this, but consider for a moment the possibility that perhaps you approached this priest originally with a lot of comparative questions, and asked specifically what the difference is between the Orthodox and the Latin Catholic church? I know you have a strong familiarity with the Latin Catholic church, being originally raised in it, and you found it possible to leave the parish in a mere years time. That’s the only reason I bring this up.

I have heard from other Latin Catholic people who have been offended by Orthodox (even priests) just upon visiting a parish. But it usually seems to be a case where the visitor asks pointed questions like “where do you stand on the Immacluate Conception?” or “Do you believe in Purgatory?” that sort of thing, and then “well, why not?” as if the Latin understanding of theology is some type of standard everyone else will be measured against.

If that is how the conversation is going, I wouldn’t be surprised some of the answers sound offensive to Latin Catholics and those who think like them. They can sound equally as dismaying when I answer those questions here on this forum.

Holy Orthodoxy should be appraoached without reference to any other Faith tradition, and judged on it’s own terms. If you ask me direct questions about the Latin Catholic church and what I think of it, I will give you very specific answers.

If I am not asked, I would not say some things. When asked directly, I will be as completely clear about it as I am able.

When my family converted to Orthodoxy, the bishop had nothing to do with it. We never talked to the bishop,

The bishops has everything to do with it.

The pastor will not make a decision unless he is aware of his bishop’s policy. If you were the first converts he ever received under this bishop, he might have had to make a call for clarification, but if you were not, the policy is in place.

Any policy changes can be communicated to the priests by encyclical. That is an ages old method for bishops to communicate with their priests.

Pax et Bonum,
Michael

 

[mathematician]

Because I don’t want to go to hell :nope:

My journey of faith has reached a crossroad, and the door to Protestantism seems to be shut behind me (lack of apostolic succession amongst other things). That leaves me with a somewhat limited choice, and all I see is people tossing bits and pieces of decrees and councils at each other, claiming that to be binding og non-binding… and I can’t find up or down in the awful mess.

I was thinking that if the Orthodox view was a bit softer than the Catholic, I would only have to do a Pascal’s Wager… and go Roman.

Sigh the whole reason I started going down the Sacred Traditon road, was that I lost confidence in my own “infallibilty” in such matters :ehh:

• CB

One difference between the Eastern Orthodox and the West is that although they are very conservative in their dogmatic theology, they have far fewer dogmas than any western church. You don’t have to believe as much, because the emphasis is more on God’s unknowability. The West pays lip service to that, and then goes on to develop a theology which only just stops short of telling you the colour of God’s socks.

 

[Mickey]

One difference between the Eastern Orthodox and the West is that although they are very conservative in their dogmatic theology, they have far fewer dogmas than any western church. You don’t have to believe as much, because the emphasis is more on God’s unknowability.

Mystery, mystery, mystery!

 

[valient_Lucy]

Contrabass101, I know how you feel. I was raised Protestant too, and even now, after my conversion, I occasionally feel doubts. Sometimes I wonder if God actually exists, and if I just signed on to a fairy tale. Sometimes I wonder about the Orthodox churches, since I never bothered to investigate them before I converted, and it terrifies me because I know that even if I did somehow discover they were true, I would never have the strength to convert again, to go through all of that again.

But then I try to remember that God loves us poor sinners, and he is not simply looking for an excuse to condemn us, or toying with us by giving us trick questions. I try to remember that Jesus promised that if we seek, we shall find, and that we have a loving Father who would never give us a snake when we ask for a fish. I remember how God has brought me through very long bouts of clinical depression, my parents’ divorce, and a very debilitating knee surgery, and that surely He would continue to help me in the future, if I ask Him for help. Then I pray that God will show me the truth, and that He will give me the grace to be faithful to Him in all things, and to obey Him in all things.

I do believe that God brought me out of Protestantism and into the Catholic Church. I have faith that God would not deceive me or lead me on some wild goose chase. However, I also believe that if God did reveal to me that the Orthodox church (or some other church) is right, I believe that God would give me the grace to follow that. I don’t really expect that to happen, but I believe that God has given me the grace to follow him and persevere in very difficult decisions before, and I have to trust that he would do that again in the future. If there is no God, I’ll probably just stay put, since nothing is going to reveal the truth for me, and without God, there’s not really any reason to believe that there is truth, or that I could remotely even determine what the truth is.

God has brought you to this point for a reason. You’re right, you can’t determine the truth on your own power, and neither can I. But God did not bring you to this point simply to abandon you. Remember, Jesus promised that those who seek will find, and that our Heavenly Father would never give us a snake if we ask for a fish. God surely would not ignore a prayer for truth and guidance in finding His Church. Pray, attend both churches if you like, and ask questions. Most of all, do not be afraid, but have faith. I’ll pray for you, and I hope you’ll pray for me, wherever God leads you in your journey.

 

[East_and_West]

Mystery, mystery, mystery!

This attitude really bothers me for two reasons. 1. It is not really an apreciation of how far God is above us. It is a lack of respect for the fact that God gives us revelation in a manner that is clear enough for us to understand. And 2. It is a rejection of reason, which in unchristiant because Christ is the LOGOS. The Catholic Church professes faith and reason, where as the EO church professes blind faith. Not a good philosophical position to be in.

 

[Mickey]

This attitude really bothers me for two reasons.

I did not ask your opinion. I already know where you stand.

 

[East_and_West]

I did not ask your opinion. I already know where you stand.

I only bring this up because people are always excited and impressed by words like “mystery”, especially if uttered in a hushed reverant tone or repeated over and over like a mantra, without investigating what is really being said.

 

[Mickey]

I only bring this up because people are always excited and impressed by words like “mystery”, especially if uttered in a hushed reverant tone or repeated over and over like a mantra, without investigating what is really being said.

Ah, but the Holy Eucharist is a great Mystery! In fact, Mystery is synonymous with Sacrament.

 

[East_and_West]

Ah, but the Holy Eucharist is a great Mystery! In fact, Mystery is synonymous with Sacrament.

I understand that that is what it means. However, my brother, many modern EOs try to use the term in an almost anti-rational matter. Since most modern men are plauged by subjectivism and the irrationality of modern philosophy, it sounds great to them.

 

[Mickey]

I understand that that is what it means. However, my brother, many modern EOs try to use the term in an almost anti-rational matter.

Have you taken a worldwide poll to corroborate this generalization?

 

[East_and_West]

Have you taken a worldwide poll to corroborate this generalization?

Absolutely. I contacted Zogby international and…
Give me a brerak Mickey. Its pretty much common knowledge that subjectivism is the philosophy that rules the day.

 

[Mickey]

A perfect example is the word “transubstantiation”-- very unnecessary word. The Early Church knew no such term. The Holy Eucharist is the most precious Body and Blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and life everlasting. A beautiful Mystery!

There was no need for scientific explanations and scholastic definitions.

And do not get me started on subjectivism.

 

[East_and_West]

A perfect example is the word “transubstantiation”-- very unnecessary word. The Early Church knew no such term. The Holy Eucharist is the most precious Body and Blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and life everlasting. A beautiful Mystery!

There was no need for scientific explanations and scholastic definitions.

And do not get me started on subjectivism.

Another problem I have with Eastern Orthodoxy: Creating problems when there are none. Transubstantiation provides no scientific explanation of the Eucharist. It just teaches the same thing you believe: IT looks and acts like bread and wine but is really Jesus. Jeesh.

 

[Mickey]

It just teaches the same thing you believe

Great. Thaen you no longer need that strange word.

 

[East_and_West]

Great. Thaen you no longer need that strange word.

I think its a cool word. You know, hypostatic union is a new word too. So is Trinity. The Apostles didn’t use these words. Should we get rid of them as well?

 

[Mickey]

I think its a cool word. You know, hypostatic union is a new word too. So is Trinity. The Apostles didn’t use these words. Should we get rid of them as well?

Yet I see clear explanations in Scripture about Trinity and hypostasis. But I do not see transubstantiation? I see that the bread and wine are Christ’s Body and Blood, but I do not see the odd scholastic explanation about accidents and such.

The term transubstantiation seems to have been first used by Hildebert of Tours (about 1079).

 

[Mickey]

I think its a cool word.

Then go with it Chris!

 

[mathematician]

A perfect example is the word “transubstantiation”-- very unnecessary word. The Early Church knew no such term. The Holy Eucharist is the most precious Body and Blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and life everlasting. A beautiful Mystery!

There was no need for scientific explanations and scholastic definitions.

Couldn’t agree more.