Greek Orthodox vs Roman Catholic

  • Thread starter Thread starter grkflower
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

grkflower

Guest
I am doing this term paper for religion class based on Greek Orthodox vs Roman Catholic Churches. What are similarity and differences between the two religions. I am really having a hard time doing this term paper. I really appreciate everyone help me with this.
 
canne said:
Hi, Both are Catholic. The Greek Orthodox is the Eastern rite and the other, The Latin rite (aka Roman Catholics). Here is a link hope it helps.

ewtn.com/expert/answers/catholic_rites_and_churches.htm

catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=10068
Click to expand...
This is not correct. What those articles are talking about are Eastern Catholic churches, that are part of the Catholic Church. The OP is asking about Eastern Orthodox Church, of which the Greek Orthodox is part of. The Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Catholic churches separated around 1054 AD. The Eastern Catholic churches are in full communion with the Roman Catholic church (you may want to look up “uniatism”), and are under the Bishop of Rome (the Pope).
 
The most obvious difference would be the hierarchy, while Roman Catholics believe that certain Bishops possess more power than others, Greek Orthodox believe in an equality of all Bishops, the model used by the Greeks does not mean all are of equal honour, responsibility, or privilage, just that all hold the same office and are peers. Certain privilages have been granted to certain Bishops over time, and the scope of the job may be different.
I’m not sure how well I explained that, or how to explain it better, but hopefully it gives you a starting point to look into it.

There is also the issue of definition of Doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church believes in a development of doctrine, while the Greeks believe that everything was laid out at the beginning and the only reason to even define a doctrine is if necessary, usually due to heresy.
 
grkflower said:
What are similarity and differences between the two religions.
Click to expand...
-Filioque (a novelty under anathema of four councils, rejected by Orthodox)

-Leavened vs unleavened (a novelty rejected by Orthodox) bread in Liturgy.

-Married vs unmarried (a novelty rejected by Orthodox) priests (all bishops are celibate)

-Created grace (a novelty rejected by Orthodox)

-Papal supremacy (a novelty rejected by Orthodox as opposed to Papal primacy )

-Papal infallibility (a novelty rejected by Orthodox)

-Purgatory (a novelty rejected by Orthodox)

-Ancestral Sin as Orthodox understanding viz Original Sin as RCs understanding.
 
eOxy said:
-Filioque (a novelty under anathema of four councils, rejected by Orthodox)

-Leavened vs unleavened (a novelty rejected by Orthodox) bread in Liturgy.

-Married vs unmarried (a novelty rejected by Orthodox) priests (all bishops are celibate)

-Created grace (a novelty rejected by Orthodox)

-Papal supremacy (a novelty rejected by Orthodox as opposed to Papal primacy )

-Papal infallibility (a novelty rejected by Orthodox)

-Purgatory (a novelty rejected by Orthodox)

-Ancestral Sin as Orthodox understanding viz Original Sin as RCs understanding.
Click to expand...
What about Transubstantiation?
 
JonNC said:
What about Transubstantiation?
Click to expand...
Yes, Orthodox Epiklesis vs RCs Transubstantiation - although this is a slight difference, IMHO.

This may not be exhaustive list, there is a chance I forgot something. Others will correct me.
 
Greetings and peace be with you grkflower, welcome to the forum; and I hope you find some answers for your work’

You may not find this very helpful but, the same God hears all our prayers, despite all our differences, there is only one Jesus Christ who died for all our sins. If only we could follow the example of Jesus and wash each others feet, then I believe we can overcome all other barriers.

You will never look into the eyes of anyone who does not matter to God.

Blessings

Eric
 
JonNC said:
What about Transubstantiation?
Click to expand...
It depends on what you mean by the word.

Properly, transsubstantiation is an attempt to explain HOW the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ. In this theory, the SUBSTANCE (which has a technical meaning) of the former are replaced by the SUBSTANCE of the Latter, but the physical appearances and qualities of the bread and wine (technically called “accidents”) remain unchanged.

Orthodoxy does not try to define the manner of the change to the Body and Blood of Christ, but simply used the term “change”, as expressed in the Epiclesis: “Make this bread the Precious Body of Your Christ, and that which is in this chalice the Precious Blood of Your Christ, changing them by Your Holy Spirit.”

This is NOT to be interpreted as saying that the Words of Institution are not an important part of the Anaphora, and can be omitted at will. Indeed, arguing about which part of the Anaphora is “consecratory” is like arguing about which part of the Lord’s Prayer is the essential clause.
 
Nine_Two said:
The most obvious difference would be the hierarchy, while Roman Catholics believe that certain Bishops possess more power than others, Greek Orthodox believe in an equality of all Bishops, the model used by the Greeks does not mean all are of equal honour, responsibility, or privilage, just that all hold the same office and are peers. Certain privilages have been granted to certain Bishops over time, and the scope of the job may be different.
I’m not sure how well I explained that, or how to explain it better, but hopefully it gives you a starting point to look into it.

There is also the issue of definition of Doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church believes in a development of doctrine, while the Greeks believe that everything was laid out at the beginning and the only reason to even define a doctrine is if necessary, usually due to heresy.
Click to expand...
I would argue with this doctrine point, the catholic church has over time formally deffined preexisting doctrine, such as the role of the Bishop of Rome, “Transubstantiation” among other things. Doctrines which did already exist, but previously went undefined in any formal matter because it was generally just accepted all over the early church. It wasn’t until there was a formal challenge (more often than not) that the church would finally go back, and specifically define doctrine.
 
crazzeto said:
I would argue with this doctrine point, the catholic church has over time formally deffined preexisting doctrine, such as the role of the Bishop of Rome, “Transubstantiation” among other things. Doctrines which did already exist, but previously went undefined in any formal matter because it was generally just accepted all over the early church. It wasn’t until there was a formal challenge (more often than not) that the church would finally go back, and specifically define doctrine.
Click to expand...
Funny how the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental doesn’t agree with it on so many of those point that it has gone back and defined.
 
crazzeto said:
I would argue with this doctrine point, the catholic church has over time formally deffined preexisting doctrine, such as the role of the Bishop of Rome, “Transubstantiation” among other things. Doctrines which did already exist, but previously went undefined in any formal matter because it was generally just accepted all over the early church. It wasn’t until there was a formal challenge (more often than not) that the church would finally go back, and specifically define doctrine.
Click to expand...
I would argue that what you say is a popularly held myth.

In fact, if a dogma is not recognized in the east (the cradle of Christianity), it can not be an original belief, it is a fake of later contrivance. The Vincentian Canon is worth studying here because it is a well crafted explanation of this concept.

As a separate issue, the most proper forum for redefining or clarifying doctrine would be a Council of all the bishops, where each attendee gets just one vote. The western church has bypassed this procedure so it’s decisions are automatically suspect.

Individual bishops, even patriarchs (including the bishops of Rome), have never had the right to define dogma on their own authority. The Received Faith is the inherited patrimony of the entire church and will be expressed clearly early in the church.
 
Nine_Two said:
Funny how the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental doesn’t agree with it on so many of those point that it has gone back and defined.
Click to expand...
Things that, according to the theory, we all believed at some point and then somewhere down the line both the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches must have ceased to believe something that we all used to hold. 🤷

(or even better we still believe it but just don’t realize it) 👍

Yours in Christ
Joe
 
josephdaniel29 said:
Things that, according to the theory, we all believed at some point and then somewhere down the line both the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches must have ceased to believe something that we all used to hold. 🤷
Click to expand...
Collective amnesia?

Forgetfulness en masse?

Wow … what a concept. 😃

The assertion is that we have believed something but don’t actually know that we have believed it. It reminds me of the Watchtower concept of “New Light”.
 
grkflower said:
I am doing this term paper for religion class based on Greek Orthodox vs Roman Catholic Churches. What are similarity and differences between the two religions. I am really having a hard time doing this term paper. I really appreciate everyone help me with this.
Click to expand...
eOxy gave the list, I’ve bolded below - it’s a great list. Although there may be some other differences, this should be exhaustive enough for your class term paper:

**-Filioque (a novelty under anathema of four councils, rejected by Orthodox)

-Leavened vs unleavened (a novelty rejected by Orthodox) bread in Liturgy.

-Married vs unmarried (a novelty rejected by Orthodox) priests (all bishops are celibate)

-Created grace (a novelty rejected by Orthodox)

-Papal supremacy (a novelty rejected by Orthodox as opposed to Papal primacy )

-Papal infallibility (a novelty rejected by Orthodox)

-Purgatory (a novelty rejected by Orthodox)

-Ancestral Sin as Orthodox understanding viz Original Sin as RCs understanding.**

As far as similarities between Greek Orthodox & Roman Catholicism…Both practice:

Infant Baptism

Confirmation (although in GO, it is done immediately after Baptism & in RC usually done in teenage years, if at all)

Reception of the Holy Eucharist (in the GO, this begins immediately after Baptism/Confirmation with infants & in the RO, it begins as an older child, if at all) GO celebrate the Holy Eucharist in a Church Service called Divine Liturgy celebrated on Sundays and certain Feast Days & RC currently celebrate the Holy Eucharist in a Church Service called the Mass on a daily basis.

Both Churches have an ordained Priesthood (GO have both monastic priests and married priests & for the most part RC only have unmarried priests the majority of which are not monastic)

Both Churches have unmarried Bishops

Both Churches acknowledge Jesus as the 2nd Person of the Most Holy Trinity

Both Churches have Saints that are recognized in the Church calendar and celebrated with Feast Days and also keep & venerate the relics of the Saints

Both honor Mary as the Theotokos, the birth-giver of God.

Both Churches recognize the same New Testament books of the Bible.

This is, like eOxy’s, not an exhaustive list, but hopefully enough to get you started on that paper of yours. 🙂
 
Not to derail, but how is unleavened bread an innovation when that was what was used at the passover?
 
Doesn’t a term paper require sources other than “read it on the internet?” You should be working from books, articles, and web sources such as the Vatican Website and the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

I cannot believe you are having difficulty finding information on either the Orthodox or Catholic Church. There are literally thousands of books, articles, and websites that will aid you.

Seems like maybe you are wanting others to do the work you should be doing.
 
ralphinal said:
Not to derail, but how is unleavened bread an innovation when that was what was used at the passover?
Click to expand...
:banghead:

The last supper happened before the Jewish Passover Meal that year - it happened during the Preparation of the Passover. Read the Gospel accounts for goodness sake!

The first time the Church of Rome began using Unleavened Bread for the Holy Eucharist wasn’t until around the 8th century & amazingly, shortly there after, they - like you, began accusing Orthodox of using Leavened Bread even though it had been the norm since the very beginning of the Church.

It’s amazing how many Traditions/traditions have been lost in the West - no Catholic from the first couple of centuries would in anyway recognize a modern-day Catholic Church as Catholic. Their practices are different, their Church structure is different, their Liturgy/Mass is different, their Theology is different…
 
Some differences are:

The Greek Orthodox priests can marry.

There are 7 sacraments in Roman Catholicism. There is no set number of sacraments in the Eastern Orthodox. Basically, anything that brings you closer to God can be considered a sacrament in the Eastern Rite.

To receive communion, the bread is leavened in the Eastern Rite and not in the Latin Rite.

The actual ceremony of mass is different between both rites, from the priestly vestments, to the the liturgy (Eastern Rites sing many parts of the liturgy and the Roman Rite does not), to the way the Eucharist is prepared for consumption (the Eastern Rite mixes the bread with the wine and the Roman Rite does not).

Also, the heavy use of incense is much greater in the Eastern Rite.

There are more, but these are only a few I could think of right now.

Deacons have a much greater role in the Eastern Rite than in the Latin Rite
 
Norrin said:
Some differences are:

The Greek Orthodox priests can marry. NO THEY CAN’T! Men can marry and then become priests, but no priest can marry after being ordained even if his wife dies!

There are 7 sacraments in Roman Catholicism. There is no set number of sacraments in the Eastern Orthodox. Basically, anything that brings you closer to God can be considered a sacrament in the Eastern Rite.

To receive communion, the bread is leavened in the Eastern Rite and not in the Latin Rite.

The actual ceremony of mass is different between both rites, from the priestly vestments, to the the liturgy (Eastern Rites sing many parts of the liturgy and the Roman Rite does not), to the way the Eucharist is prepared for consumption (the Eastern Rite mixes the bread with the wine and the Roman Rite does not). Divine Liturgy is the correct term, not “Mass” - a word that didn’t exist until the Middle Ages due to the ignorance of the people - they could not speak Latin, but Catholic services were only celebrated in Latin. In the Orthodox Divine Liturgy the entire service is Chanted or Sung with the exception of the recitation of the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer.

Also, the heavy use of incense is much greater in the Eastern Rite. Orthodox is a Church, not a Rite.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top