Why is the Eastern Orthodox Church false?

[josephdaniel29]

Is there a difference between the old calendar followers and old calendarists?

Yes. Some canonical Churches such as the Russian Church are still on the Old Calendar. Other groups such as the Greek Old Calendarist went into schism after the calendar change saying that New Calendar Churches are graceless.

Who determines who is canonical?

Canonicity is determined by autocephaly and the diptychs. If you are on the territory of an autocephalous Church then you must be in communion with that Church’s synod to be considered canonical. If you are an autocephalous Church your canonicity is determined by whether or not your primate is commemorated by the other autocephalous primates.

• EO are the ones who set the limit at 7 councils, not the Catholic Church.
• One is either disposed to believing what is true or they are not. But that disposition doesn’t change what is true.

You still didn’t answer my question. Since we share the Seven Ecumenical Councils lets confine the question to those gatherings. Can you name a dogmatic pronouncement that doesn’t have a direct bearing on an individual’s salvation?

Do you have a specific reference?

BTW, anathema doesn’t mean condemned to hell.

So can a Catholic deny the Assumption, not repent before death, and still make it to heaven? Isn’t it a mortal sin for a Catholic to deny a dogma of the Church?

If a teaching was taught in the past and is currently being taught, such as toll houses, then it is a doctrine…true? If the Russians teach it, by numbers aren’t they the majority of EO?

They are the majority. Of course truth is not decided by a majority vote.

As I pointed out in a previous post,

The following came from a RO website.
sthermanoca.org/documents…oll_Houses.pdf

From:
“DTH 602, Dogmatic Theology”
by
Dr. Harry Boosalis is Greek Orthodox
Fr. John Armstrong is OCA

Have you read the link? It’s a quick read.

Toll houses are clearly taught and brought into the liturgy. See for yourself. I don’t agree with toll houses, I’m just observing it’s taught in EO.

Are we talking past each other? There is no doubt some Orthodox teach and believe in Arial Toll Houses. As to it clearly being brought into the liturgy that is not true. There is a big difference between saying there is some kind of trials and purification after death, which we all believe, and the very clearly defined idea of precisely twenty Arial Toll Houses.

Which church? Seems you’re not all on the same page.

Sure we are. We all believe there is a middle state.

Wait a minute. As I’m reading these threads, aren’t individual’s (the rank and file) (name removed by moderator)ut in EO counted equally with bishops, deacons, priests etc? As I understand it, the laity have just as much say in what is approved, and they can veto a council. Am I misunderstanding something?

Yes you are. What you seem to believe is a ridiculous caricature of Orthodoxy and the life of the Holy Spirit in the Church. You are definitely approaching it from a typically Catholic, humanistic point of view.

Given conciliarism in EO, (assuming the individual in the previous link is correct) how will you ever come to any decision given how many different levels of ranks, have to agree, and the laity for example also have the power to veto a council’s conclusions ?

I will never understand this mindset. It reminds me of a famous quote from Ayn Rand, “The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody had decided not to see.” The Church has come to consensus on countless issues time and time again in its almost 2,000 year history and yet you still ask how will the Church ever reach a decision.

It will be reached the same way it has always been reached. The Holy Spirit will guide the Church as promised.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[steve_b]

Yes. Some canonical Churches such as the Russian Church are still on the Old Calendar. Other groups such as the Greek Old Calendarist went into schism after the calendar change saying that New Calendar Churches are graceless.

Are all Greeks old calendarists or just some?

How many people are we talking about roughly?
jd:

Canonicity is determined by autocephaly and the diptychs. If you are on the territory of an autocephalous Church then you must be in communion with that Church’s synod to be considered canonical. If you are an autocephalous Church your canonicity is determined by whether or not your primate is commemorated by the other autocephalous primates.

If you have multiple autoceophelous churches in an area, are you saying the first church in that area controls the canonicity of the others?
jd:

You still didn’t answer my question. Since we share the Seven Ecumenical Councils lets confine the question to those gatherings. Can you name a dogmatic pronouncement that doesn’t have a direct bearing on an individual’s salvation?

It’s been awhile since I cruised the canons of those councils. But as I recall, there are canons that don’t have direct bearing on an individual’s salvation.
jd:

So can a Catholic deny the Assumption, not repent before death, and still make it to heaven? Isn’t it a mortal sin for a Catholic to deny a dogma of the Church?

Just defining terms

2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. “*Heresy *is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; *apostasy *is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; *schism *is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”

**1861 **Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.
jd:

They are the majority. Of course truth is not decided by a majority vote.

How then do EO determine truth?
jd:

There is no doubt some Orthodox teach and believe in Arial Toll Houses. As to it clearly being brought into the liturgy that is not true.

This link clearly shows how it is brought into the liturgy.

sthermanoca.org/documents/frjohn_papers/Toll_Houses.pdf
jd:

There is a big difference between saying there is some kind of trials and purification after death, which we all believe, and the very clearly defined idea of precisely twenty Arial Toll Houses. We all believe there is a middle state.

Do all EO believe that?

 

[josephdaniel29]

Are all Greeks old calendarists or just some?

How many people are we talking about roughly?

Just some. Wikipedia places the number at 860,000.

If you have multiple autoceophelous churches in an area, are you saying the first church in that area controls the canonicity of the others?

There is no such thing as multiple autocephalous Churches on one territory.

It’s been awhile since I cruised the canons of those councils. But as I recall, there are canons that don’t have direct bearing on an individual’s salvation.

Canons are a matter of discipline and governance, not dogma.

How then do EO determine truth?

The Holy Spirit determines truth.

This link clearly shows how it is brought into the liturgy.

No it doesn’t. You are using the exact same logic Catholics use to defend the Immaculate Conception. A ECF calls Mary “immaculate” and you automatically attribute the 19th century dogma to his statement. There is a big difference between what those quotes say and the very precisely defined idea of twenty Arial Toll Houses. Are you sure you understand what the teaching on Toll Houses really is?

Do all EO believe that?

It is tradition. You can’t get everybody to agree that he sky is blue so it’s quite possible some do not.

In Christ
Joe

 

[steve_b]

There is no such thing as multiple autocephalous Churches on one territory.

Could you define territory. How big is a territory?
jd:

Canons are a matter of discipline and governance, not dogma.

Are you sure there are no condemnations mentioned for certain doctrines[teachings]? I’m thinking of the trinity for example.
jd:

The Holy Spirit determines truth.

I believe that.

But given your previous response, when there is not 100% agreement amont the various EO churches, you suggested the minority position might be right and the majority might be wrong. Therefore, in EO, who decides the HS is with the minority and against the majority in that case?

For example, I’m thinking about toll house teaching.
jd:

No it doesn’t. You are using the exact same logic Catholics use to defend the Immaculate Conception. A ECF calls Mary “immaculate” and you automatically attribute the 19th century dogma to his statement.

An oversimplification, but let’s examine your point. If the ECF’s call Mary immaculate, do you believe she is? When did her immaculateness start for her? If she wasn’t immaculate from her beginning, when did she become immaculate? Did she remain immaculate?
jd:

There is a big difference between what those quotes say and the very precisely defined idea of twenty Arial Toll Houses. Are you sure you understand what the teaching on Toll Houses really is?

Do the EO understand it? One thing is for sure, those quotes show it’s taught, and EO people believe it, because there are EO churches that teach it.

jd,

It seems simple, If toll house theology is false, and not to be believed, who then speaks for all the EO to condemn the belief, and put an end to it for all the EO for all time?
jd:

It is tradition. You can’t get everybody to agree that he sky is blue so it’s quite possible some do not.

I’m just thinking out loud, and trying to connect a few past responses. If it’s tradition [toll houses], and you recognize it as such, then who/what makes your EO tradition true and the other guys EO tradition false?

 

[josephdaniel29]

Could you define territory. How big is a territory?

Territories are defined primarily along political boundaries. Russia is a territory, Greece, Serbia, Romania etc are their own autocephalous Churches.

Are you sure there are no condemnations mentioned for certain doctrines[teachings]? I’m thinking of the trinity for example.

There are certainly anathemas but I imagine they are centered on core doctrine, not peripheral issues.

But given your previous response, when there is not 100% agreement amont the various EO churches, you suggested the minority position might be right and the majority might be wrong. Therefore, in EO, who decides the HS is with the minority and against the majority in that case?

There is rarely 100% agreement on anything but as I said, truth has nothing to do with majority vs minority. Who decides? The Church does. Sometimes a council decides, sometimes the people of God decide and sometimes an inspired individual or small group of individuals decides. There is no precise formula like Catholics seem to crave so much.

Look at the case of St Athanasius the Great. Who decided the Arians were wrong when they certainly had a huge majority both in the clergy and in the laity? In that case St Athanasius practically single handedly maintained the Orthodox faith against overwhelming numbers.

An oversimplification, but let’s examine your point. If the ECF’s call Mary immaculate, do you believe she is? When did her immaculateness start for her? If she wasn’t immaculate from her beginning, when did she become immaculate? Did she remain immaculate?

Completely off topic.

Do the EO understand it? One thing is for sure, those quotes show it’s taught, and EO people believe it, because there are EO churches that teach it.

We are going around in circles. What is your point?

It seems simple, If toll house theology is false, and not to be believed, who then speaks for all the EO to condemn the belief, and put an end to it for all the EO for all time?

Who said it was false?

I’m just thinking out loud, and trying to connect a few past responses. If it’s tradition [toll houses], and you recognize it as such, then who/what makes your EO tradition true and the other guys EO tradition false?

I never said it was false. You are making this too complicated. It’s no different that the Catholic doctrine of Limbo. Is it a doctrine of the Catholic Church? Do all Catholics believe it? Was it ever taught as doctrine? If it is believed by some and not by others who’s tradition is correct?

In Christ
Joe

 

[Ignatius]

In answer to the OP, The Eastern Orthodox Church is NOT false, nor does The Catholic Church teach that.

 

[steve_b]

Territories are defined primarily along political boundaries. Russia is a territory, Greece, Serbia, Romania etc are their own autocephalous Churches.

How does that play out in the U.S. for those autocephalous churches? What’s considered a territory
jd:

There is no precise formula like Catholics seem to crave so much

.

precision in matters of faith is good
jd:

Look at the case of St Athanasius the Great. Who decided the Arians were wrong when they certainly had a huge majority both in the clergy and in the laity? In that case St Athanasius practically single handedly maintained the Orthodox faith against overwhelming numbers.

Do you by chance have a reference?
jd:

Completely off topic.

Not fair. You brought up the issue 1st of Mary being immaculate. I merely responded to your comment.
jd:

We are going around in circles. What is your point?

Who said it was false?

Then you believe in toll houses? I was under the impression you are NOT RO. Which EO church do you belong to?
jd:

I never said it was false. You are making this too complicated. It’s no different that the Catholic doctrine of Limbo. Was it ever taught as doctrine?

If something is a continuous teaching it is doctrine. Doctrines develop, they don’t come and go.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, is what the Church teaches worldwide. You won’t find Limbo in the Catechism.

Toll houses OTOH are taught and you will see that in the following link,

orthodox.net/articles/life-after-death-john-maximovitch.html

Notice they say “there’s no doubt it’s a teaching of the Orthodox Church”? Based on that quote, it sounds to me like toll houses is doctrine. They’re not specifying Russian only are to believe this, but the “Orthodox Church” i.e. all the EO churches…right?

If it is taught so strongly and expected to be believed, and other EO say it is NOT to be believed, who’s correct?

Who decides?

 

[josephdaniel29]

How does that play out in the U.S. for those autocephalous churches? What’s considered a territory

There is no autocephalous Church proper in the U.S. although we are on a path to it.

Episcopal Assembly of North and Central America

precision in matters of faith is good

Not necessarily.

Do you by chance have a reference?

Ever heard the phrase Athanasius contra mundum, or Athanasius against the world?

Then you believe in toll houses? I was under the impression you are NOT RO. Which EO church do you belong to?

I belong to the OCA, essentially a Russian Church. I believe in a middle state but I don’t define it because the Church has not defined it. If I felt it had some bearing on my path to salvation I would put more effort into it.

If something is a continuous teaching it is doctrine. Doctrines develop, they don’t come and go.

But you have to understand the Orthodox Church hasn’t even dogmatized beliefs such as the physical assumption of Mary and that isn’t even in the realm of pious opinion. Simply because a belief is old doesn’t make it dogmatic.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, is what the Church teaches worldwide. You won’t find Limbo in the Catechism.

But it was certainly taught by saints such as Thomas Aquinas and it does appear in the Baltimore Catechism. Has the teaching of the Church changed so much in a short 120 years or is it more likely that Limbo, although certianly taught in the past, is pious opinion just like toll houses?

Notice they say “there’s no doubt it’s a teaching of the Orthodox Church”? Based on that quote, it sounds to me like toll houses is doctrine. They’re not specifying Russian only are to believe this, but the “Orthodox Church” i.e. all the EO churches…right?

My brother you can’t take a quote online as the whole of Orthodox teaching, even if it’s from a bishop. I am Orthodox, I go to church every week, I personally know Russian priests, Greek priests and a kindly Russian hieromonk. Trust me when I say toll houses are not a dogmatic teaching of the Church. Also I might note that you have been discussing this same issue with other posters on the Eastern Catholicism forum. Have you noticed that their responses have been remarkably similar to mine? Why do you think that is?

If it is taught so strongly and expected to be believed, and other EO say it is NOT to be believed, who’s correct?

We are free to accept it or not. Very much like Limbo in the Catholic Church.

Who decides?

The Church does.

In Christ
Joe

 

[steve_b]

There is no autocephalous Church proper in the U.S. although we are on a path to it.

Are there multiple autocehalous churches in the U.S?
jd:

Not necessarily.

Oh absolutely
jd:

I belong to the OCA, essentially a Russian Church. I believe in a middle state but I don’t define it because the Church has not defined it. If I felt it had some bearing on my path to salvation I would put more effort into it.

The sites I quoted obviously teach toll houses. And Russians teach toll houses, true?
jd:

But you have to understand the Orthodox Church hasn’t even dogmatized beliefs such as the physical assumption of Mary and that isn’t even in the realm of pious opinion. Simply because a belief is old doesn’t make it dogmatic.

I said doctrine, not dogma.

definitionally, doctrine = teaching
jd:

But it was certainly taught by saints such as Thomas Aquinas and it does appear in the Baltimore Catechism. Has the teaching of the Church changed so much in a short 120 years or is it more likely that Limbo, although certianly taught in the past, is pious opinion just like toll houses?

Limbo never went through development, and it didn’t remain in the Catechism. As I said earlier, doctrines don’t develop only to disappear.
jd:

My brother you can’t take a quote online as the whole of Orthodox teaching, even if it’s from a bishop.

I don’t disagree with you

The issue it seems to me, is that no ONE speaks for EO. No individual church in EO speaks for everyone. I’m also sensing that even bishops are being marginalized in their authority.
jd:

I am Orthodox, I go to church every week, I personally know Russian priests, Greek priests and a kindly Russian hieromonk. Trust me when I say toll houses are not a dogmatic teaching of the Church.

Again, I didn’t use dogma, I used doctrine.
jd:

Also I might note that you have been discussing this same issue with other posters on the Eastern Catholicism forum. Have you noticed that their responses have been remarkably similar to mine? Why do you think that is?

You guys are copying from each other???

Seriously, I don’t know. Maybe it’s like Catholics who know the Church teaches against artificial birth control, but they use it anyway.
jd:

We are free to accept it or not.

Just curious, do you have a source for that?

 

[josephdaniel29]

Are there multiple autocehalous churches in the U.S?

There are no autocephalous Churches in the U.S. in the proper sense of the term.

I said doctrine, not dogma.

definitionally, doctrine = teaching

A better definition would be official or settled teaching. If you really believe everything some member of the Church has taught at some point is doctrine then both of our Churches have some really wacky doctrines!

Limbo never went through development, and it didn’t remain in the Catechism. As I said earlier, doctrines don’t develop only to disappear.

But according to your definition of doctrine (doctrine = teaching), then Limbo used to be a doctrine of the Church because it used to be taught, and now it is no longer a doctrine. In other words Catholic doctrine has changed.

The issue it seems to me, is that no ONE speaks for EO. No individual church in EO speaks for everyone. I’m also sensing that even bishops are being marginalized in their authority.

Of course that’s really been the point of this discussion from the beginning.

That’s only an issue for you my brother. We’ve maintained the faith all these years without a “central authority” to speak for us. The reason is Holy Tradition is passed on to each successive generation. It’s not something to be “defined”, it’s something to be preserved by the Church as a whole. It’s not the role of the bishops to define anything new. It’s their job to take the baton they were handed and pass it on to the next generation whole and unchanged.

I can understand your consternation. It’s the position of the Catholic Church that the pope is the center of unity and the measure of orthodoxy. Without the pope there is nothing but division and heresy. But right there before your eyes is Orthodoxy which has maintained the faith for all these centuries all without a “central authority”, and your Catholic mind can’t understand how. I’ve often wondered; does it make you in some small way, in the far recesses of your mind, question your beliefs?

You guys are copying from each other???

Seriously, I don’t know. Maybe it’s like Catholics who know the Church teaches against artificial birth control, but they use it anyway.

Wow, that’s a really poor analogy. The teaching on artificial birth control, as far as I can tell, is an infallible teaching of the Catholic Church defined as such by the pope. Now this is the last time I’m going to say this. Arial Toll Houses are not a doctrine of the Orthodox Church.

Just curious, do you have a source for that?

Why do I need a source telling me I’m free to believe or disbelieve something that’s not a doctrine of the Church?