G
- Status
N
Nine_Two
Guest
Anyway, as you can see this forum isn’t the best place for asking questions about Orthodoxy, some people can’t help but start bashing when other groups are brought up. If you have any more questions (or don’t feel your questions were properly answered) feel free to PM myself or other Orthodox here.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Truth; Darkness scatters when the light is turned on +
T
TheosisM
Guest
N
Nine_Two
Guest
He who yells loudest is right?
H
Harpazo
Guest
For what it’s worth, I wrote a two-part article on this subject on my Examiner page a while back. You can click on the link in my signature. Fr. Thomas Hopko wrote a good explanation of the Orthodox view of how reunification would have to be. Reading that might give you a good idea of what our differences are. Hope that helps.
In Christ,
Andrew
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
The OP is “Orthodoxy Versus Catholicism” not go to my own site and hear one sided historical events with a prejudiced view against Peter and his successors in the Popes. Truth is revealed from hearing both sides, not just one side of a story. This makes the light brighter to reveal more of what is truly hidden.
Peace be with you
R
Rolltide
Guest
Gabriel of 12,
I’m not sure I’m following you in your last post. I’m guessing you’re trying to differentiate between the Eastern Catholic Churches, which are in communion with Rome, and the Eastern Orthodox Churches, which are not. You need to be more specific in your terminology.
Of course, then there are the Oriental Orthodox, and the Assyrian Church of the East, and that’s a whole other bag of worms…
I’m not sure I’m following you in your last post. I’m guessing you’re trying to differentiate between the Eastern Catholic Churches, which are in communion with Rome, and the Eastern Orthodox Churches, which are not. You need to be more specific in your terminology.
Of course, then there are the Oriental Orthodox, and the Assyrian Church of the East, and that’s a whole other bag of worms…
N
Nine_Two
Guest
So you didn’t actually read the post, just the title?
T
The_Pilgrim
Guest
I am Orthodox – have been for over a decade. Spent my first fifty years in the Episcopal Church, then went through RCIA when the going got weird, and the Holy Spirit ultimately led me to the Orthodox Church. I don’t want to say that this makes me an expert on either Catholicism or Orthodoxy – far from it. The following is my impression of the main differences between the two.
The Catholic Church teaches that the transformation at the Eucharist is brought about through transubstantiation. The Orthodox are more willing to say that we don’t really know HOW it happens, just that it does.
The Catholic Church teaches that there are seven sacraments. There is no set number taught by the Orthodox. I have seen writings that say only the two that Christ instituted, and other theologians have said there are up to twelve or fifteen!
There does, on the other hand, appear to be a more explicit doctrine of theosis in Orthodoxy, but I am willing to be proved wrong on that.
Basically, those are two examples of the main difference between East and West: there is to me a sense of mysticism in the East that is missing in the West, which appears to me to be bounded by a stronger sense of legalism.
Jusy my two cents…
- The Orthodox did not embrace the Filioque.
- The Orthodox did not embrace Thomas Aquinas.
- Vatican II: no impact on Orthodoxy.
The Catholic Church teaches that the transformation at the Eucharist is brought about through transubstantiation. The Orthodox are more willing to say that we don’t really know HOW it happens, just that it does.
The Catholic Church teaches that there are seven sacraments. There is no set number taught by the Orthodox. I have seen writings that say only the two that Christ instituted, and other theologians have said there are up to twelve or fifteen!
There does, on the other hand, appear to be a more explicit doctrine of theosis in Orthodoxy, but I am willing to be proved wrong on that.
Basically, those are two examples of the main difference between East and West: there is to me a sense of mysticism in the East that is missing in the West, which appears to me to be bounded by a stronger sense of legalism.
Jusy my two cents…
D
Deconi
Guest
Not having a go at you, Pilgrim, but some of what you say brings something to mind.
The West is flooded and bombarded with questions and issues about the faith we share in The Carpenter and His Teaching! Sure, on a local level, the East may encounter as much, but the West fields these queries AND deals with them on a GLOBAL scale.
There is something beautiful about ‘mysteries’ but then it confines it to ‘blind faith’ and ONLY the followers may possess the depth of understanding required to accept it. Christianity, is NOT a blind faith, per se. We undertsand that God created ALL that is seen and unseen. Therefore, it should follow that all that can be seen or discovered, through our senses and reasoning, MUST be able to be definable as best as human language enables.
East and West KNOW God by Name! Ours, is not a blind faith. To us also was given the mission of professing the Gospel to the four corners of the earth, for all existence. From ‘us’ (East&West) have the globe come to know God BY Name!..something ‘His Chosen people’ deny! ALL other Christians have learned from us, albeit, some in their obstinance, protest that fact; yet history and tangible records exist as evidence for all examiners and investigators. An alien would know God by Name through ‘us.’
I hope you see, that it isn’t that the West has a tendancy to ‘provide’ and explanation for mysteries; it is that She CAN!..when required to DEFINE for the faithful what is different from heresy, and may be misleading to other souls! Remember, our mission is for EVERY soul; not (only) Christians! The New Israel is not only universal, it is The Universe!
This brings to mind The Keys of The Kingdom. Although our core difference is Papal Primacy, the evidence is clear that the West under the Pontiff, has exercised use of those Keys on several instances of history, than in the East.
There are some lists of our differences, but the FIRST one, is all that matters! History shows that an ‘Eastern’ See claimed the same primacy as the Roman See and commenced all that we now argue over. There is so much richness in the tapestry of East and West that debates and arguments about legitimacy of our stances OUTSTRIPS the arguments from the protesting sector. This is ‘natural’ because siblings always make the most difficult adversary or opponent!
When the smoke clears, there will be only ONE issue to settle; Papal Primacy! This extremely, extremely difficult because it requires the most basic of human concession; humility, and confession. That is to say, “I was wrong. You are right!”
An Eastern See did it before, which was indicative and defining for me.
God Bless
N
Nine_Two
Guest
I’m sorry, which Eastern See claimed the same Primacy Rome now claims?
M
Mickey
Guest
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
]QUOTE=Mickey;6306077]Wow…so much anger.
May your journey through the Lenten season be fruitful.
Hello Mickey, haven’t had much practice on spelling Magisterium, or is it Magesterium?
I don’t know Mickey? I reread my posts and I don’t pick up on any anger as you have expressed.
Tell me, while your judging posts? how do you judge “Hesichios” posts here;
“Perhaps it is not your fault, there is a lot of Latin triumphalistic garbage available from Catholic sources, which tend to skim lightly over important historical information that might embarrass the church”.
How does one judge a deception or a typo error here?
“**The Synod of Frankfort (794AD), with two Papal legates in attendance endorsed the theology of the Libri Carolini and condemned the restoration of Icons at the Seventh Ecumenical Council. **All the Frankish and German bishops were represented, and the English church later approved.
The Synod of Paris (825AD) renewed the Frankfort condemnation of the Seventh Ecumenical Council and the restoration of images.
Now as a matter of fact, Pope Hadrian approved of the Seventh Ecumenical Council and the restoration of images, but the church in the north did not. After the news of what had happened in Frankfort arrived in Rome none of his (Pope Hadrian’s) efforts could change the position of the Frankish church.”
Your familiar with Eastern history how judge Hesichios’s comments and history?, anger, deception or typo error.
How does righteous get judged for proving error?
“Working out my salvation with fear and trembling” Peace be with you
M
Mickey
Guest
I believe his statements are accurate.
There is no need for you to be so angry.
PS–It’s “magisterium”.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
I believe his statements are accurate.
Which one of his/her statements do you find accurate? the negative (anger?) comments about the Catholic Church? or the confusing history about the Popes?There is no need for you to be so angry.
PS–It’s “magisterium”.
Debating the details of history can become endless, the final outcome is what suffices the accuracy, to which I have pointed out here. I find it hard to believe that two stemming views from history resulting in the same outcome, can be attained, especially if one applies his/her own personal negative convictions (from a far) during the details of history, which conflict with what was the “status quo” from history.
We disagree on what is anger, and what is being called to " Caution". What may appear to be anger to you, is the response of unneccessary personal attacks on the Popes and “Magisterium” (thank you:thumbsup
Here is the crutch of the matter, from the point I had original wanted to make; When one is speaking of “Orthodoxy” from an unlearned non catholic or western Protestant view tend to group “all Eastern Church’s” in communion with the Pope to be “all Orthodox Church’s” in schism or opposition to the Pope.
I have found from the Orthodox Church’s in schism with the Pope, tend to draw protestants with agree-able protesting view’s against Peter’s Chair occupied by his successors in the Popes. When I come across Protestants and non-catholics grouping all of the above as one whole Eastern Orthodox church in opposition to the Popes, I have to inform them they have been decieved, and make the long drawn out corrections, which places the Orthodox Church’s in opposition to the Popes in the minority category whom are not in communion with each other, splintering their schism even more.
It is my prayer that this tongue of the serpent be stomped out from decieving God’s sheep. If you label this action “anger” then I am guilty as charged, so long as the serpent from his lair is exposed from striking God’s children with the poison of deception.
Peace be with you
R
Rachel_Malloy
Guest
This thread is now closed.
- Status