Anyone know what are the differences between the Reformed Faith (Calvinism) and the Eastern Orthodox Faith?
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Differences Between Reformed and Orthodox?
- Thread starter Ecclesia Reformata
- Start date
- Status
Matrona
Lady Godiva Freedom Rider
Other posters will be able to go into more detail, but the Orthodox dispute all five points of the TULIP. We don't believe in "irresistible grace", "double predestination", "preservation of the saints" (OSAS), or any other such doctrines that were never followed by any church in Christendom prior to Calvin.
Upvote
0
Oblio
Creed or Chaos
- Jun 24, 2003
- 22,324
- 865
- 66
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Hmmm ...
Since the Reformation was a backlash against the Western Church (which had separated from the East 500 years prior), and all of Protestantism stems from that, I'd say quite a bit.
One doesn't reinvent a Church that was promised by Christ Himself to never fail
Since the Reformation was a backlash against the Western Church (which had separated from the East 500 years prior), and all of Protestantism stems from that, I'd say quite a bit.
One doesn't reinvent a Church that was promised by Christ Himself to never fail
Upvote
0
Oblio said:Hmmm ...
Since the Reformation was a backlash against the Western Church (which had separated from the East 500 years prior), and all of Protestantism stems from that, I'd say quite a bit.
One doesn't reinvent a Church that was promised by Christ Himself to never fail
Well first, it wasn't a reinvention, but rather a "reformation." Also, I am asking about the doctrinal differences, not the history of each.
So, would Eastern Orthodoxy affirm the 5 Points of Arminianism, then? The acronym commonly known as DAISY?
Upvote
0
Matrona
Lady Godiva Freedom Rider
This explains the TULIP and the DAISY from a 5-point Calvinist perspective: http://www.grace-bible.com/laymans-a_comparison_of_calvinism_arminianism.htmAndreas said:What are the 5 points?
Upvote
0
May I advise caution, as this is a very difficult question. Reducing complex theological considerations to catchy flower names and slogans is cute, but it's also very dangerous, as most of the original meaning and context is lost.
For example, "Perseverance of the Saints", the P of the tulip, is not at all synonymous with the Baptist "once saved, always saved", as it was suggested. Here an Orthodox layman is interacting with Calvin's view on free will and its relation to divine decree.
Neither are the five tulip letters the points of contention between the Catholic Church and Calvin. Rather, they signifiy only the objections of the Arminians. In fact, Catholics are free to agree with many, but not all of the tulip slogans, given that they are rightly understood.
For example, "Perseverance of the Saints", the P of the tulip, is not at all synonymous with the Baptist "once saved, always saved", as it was suggested. Here an Orthodox layman is interacting with Calvin's view on free will and its relation to divine decree.
Neither are the five tulip letters the points of contention between the Catholic Church and Calvin. Rather, they signifiy only the objections of the Arminians. In fact, Catholics are free to agree with many, but not all of the tulip slogans, given that they are rightly understood.
Upvote
0
- Nov 28, 2003
- 24,447
- 15,019
- 60
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
Ecclesia Reformata said:
Cyril Lukaris, Patriarch of Constantinople in 1620, was very anti-Rome and allied himself with the Reformationists, by whom he apparently became heavily influenced as he subsequently produced a "confession of faith" (1629) that was decidedly Calvinist. Either that or the "confession" was a forgery as believed by many since it flatly contradicted statements made in Cyril's homilies
The Confession Of Dositheus, Patriarch of Jerusalem (1672), was the definitive Orthodox response to the Confession of Cyril at that time, and strongly repudiates all Calvinist doctrines expressed therein.
(You can read it here in Greek and Latin if you want
)John.
Upvote
0
Patristic
Koine addict
Matrona said:
Whoever it was representing the Arminian position is absolutely clueless. The least he/she could have done is explain the real Arminian belief system compared to calvinism and give the quotes from Scripture they use to back those premises up. All this person did was present a caricature of the position that they disliked and present it in the worst possible light, with insulting terminology.
Upvote
0
Benedicta00
Well-Known Member
Oblio said:Hmmm ...
Since the Reformation was a backlash against the Western Church (which had separated from the East 500 years prior), and all of Protestantism stems from that, I'd say quite a bit.
One doesn't reinvent a Church that was promised by Christ Himself to never fail
Oblio,
I hope you know that the western Church was the target but that does not mean that the western Church holds any of these doctrines that Calvin invented. The reformers took the writing of some western CF and twisted them to mean what they wanted. Catholics believe basically the same thing as Orthodox on the issue of grace. Calvinism theory was condemned as heresy by the Church.
Upvote
0
Benedicta00
Well-Known Member
Patristic said:
From what I can tell, the Thomaist tradition is a matter of opinion. Augustine had his and Aquinas had his, neither contradict the Church. There is a doctrine of Predestination and theologians have given their insight but as far as I know, I don't have to go with Thomasit tradition if I do not choose to. The Church's position is that God chooses us, we, not Him and we have been given the preveninet grace to respond to Him but responding requires our free will assent to cooperate with the graces.
We believe there are those who were predestined like the saints and the mother of God, like Pharaoh and the Jews but God predestines according to His foreknowledge, He did not grant irresistible grace to Mary who choose God's will and He did not with hold grace from Pharaoh who choose against God's will. He allows our free will choices.
We believe the elect are those who are saved and we believe the reprobates are those who will not be saved and the only one who knows who's who is God. We believe in His foreknowledge he grants the grace of perseverance to those who do not reject Him unto death and He will allow the hardening of heart for those who reject Him and blaspheme the Holy Spirit unto death.
So I don't know the entire Thomaist view but this is the teaching of the Church, as long as Aquinas does not contradict this teaching, which I dont believe he has, one is free to hold a pious opinion of his tradition.
Upvote
0
Patristic
Koine addict
From what I have read of the Thomist tradition, it seems to hold many things in common with Calvinism. Nevertheless, there is still considerable debate over whether or not the Thomistic position is the same as that of Thomas Aquinas. My understanding of Thomist position is taken from Father Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange's book, Predestination. From what I have been able to gather, the Thomistic reading of Aquinas shares many similar thoughts with Calvinism while the Jesuit reading lead to the other dominant school of thought Molinism. I know that Father William Most has been arguing for a third alternative between the two, but as far as I am able to gather the two dominant schools of thought are Thomist and Molinist.
Upvote
0
Matrona
Lady Godiva Freedom Rider
I saw your post before you deleted it, but I figured an Administrator would eventually remember on his own that, being a Protestant, he's not supposed to debate here.Gabriel said:
However, I'd be pleased to discuss my beliefs further in a more appropriate forum.
Upvote
0
Matrona
Lady Godiva Freedom Rider
Well, when I saw that Gabriel had deleted what he had written, I found that in another window I still had the thread loaded from before he had deleted it, so I saved what he deleted to my computer. I'm resourceful like that.
The meat of the post (oh, sorry, I shouldn't say the m-word during Lent, it's making me hungry for that chicken in the freezer!) was basically one looooooong listing of the scriptural citations that Calvinists use to prove their theology and soteriology. But the way it was all written was very, well, debate-y. Not meant for this forum.
The meat of the post (oh, sorry, I shouldn't say the m-word during Lent, it's making me hungry for that chicken in the freezer!) was basically one looooooong listing of the scriptural citations that Calvinists use to prove their theology and soteriology. But the way it was all written was very, well, debate-y. Not meant for this forum.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
