EO and RCC.

[Jesse Dornfeld]

Wondering what the differences are in doctrine between these two branches of Christianity. Thanks for any answers.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Wondering what the differences are in doctrine between these two branches of Christianity. Thanks for any answers.

Well you should ask the differences between the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church and the Church of Rome. The EO ARE Catholic. There are some similarities and some large differences. For one thing, we do not recognize the pope of Rome (as Rome defines him). Our doctrine of "original sin" is different and influences many differences after that.

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

Well you should ask the differences between the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church and the Church of Rome. The EO ARE Catholic. There are some similarities and some large differences. For one thing, we do not recognize the pope of Rome (as Rome defines him). Our doctrine of "original sin" is different and influences many differences after that.

Apologies for getting the Catholic thing wrong... Might I ask what these differences are in original sin?

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Apologies for getting the Catholic thing wrong... Might I ask what these differences are in original sin?

OK that is easy. The EO has Ancestral Sin that is a bit different than Original Sin.

Ancestral Versus Original Sin | St. Mary Orthodox Church


PS - You probably should ask questions like this on the EO board, the Ancient way, unless you got something specific to ask the Catholics.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Apologies for getting the Catholic thing wrong... Might I ask what these differences are in original sin?

Pavel answered you

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

Before the 1,054 A.D. Schism there were 5 Patriarchal Bishops of the Church
(5 Holy Sees - Constantinople, Rome, Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria)

Pentarchy - Wikipedia


The 5 Patriarchs during the 1,054 A.D. Schism were :

• Constantinople : Michael Kerularios (1000-1059 A.D.)
• Rome : Leo IX (1002-1082 A.D.)
• Alexandria : Leontius (1052-1059 A.D.)
• Antioch : Peter III of Antioch (1052-1056 A.D.) or John IV, V, or Dionysius (1051-62 A.D.)
• Jerusalem : Sophronios II (1040-1059 A.D.) or Ioannikios (1048-?)

.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Wondering what the differences are in doctrine between these two branches of Christianity. Thanks for any answers.

Catholics will say the differences are few and small. Orthodox will say the differences are many and huge. If you want to know what they think are the many and huge differences go to their forum and ask them. They will tell you all about it. You will get two ear-fulls. We are essentially the same. We share the same sacraments. We share the same Church Fathers. We just grew apart when the paths of communication grew treacherous as the Roman Empire declined. Catholics are ready for re-union. But it ain't gonna happen.

 

[zippy2006]

Apologies for getting the Catholic thing wrong... Might I ask what these differences are in original sin?

No, you didn't get it wrong. @Yeshua HaDerekh is introducing polemics into this thread. The proper name of our Church is the Catholic Church, not the Roman Church. The idea that it is the "Roman Church" is an EO polemic used to downplay Catholics. It would be equally true to say that the Catholic Church is orthodox as to say that the Orthodox Church is catholic. It's a difference of proper nouns.

Further, the Catholic Church is not limited to Rome. There are 23 Eastern Catholic Churches which are part of the Catholic Church, do not use the Roman Rite, and accept things like Papal Primacy.

 

[zippy2006]

Wondering what the differences are in doctrine between these two branches of Christianity. Thanks for any answers.

Two of the biggest differences are the filioque and the understanding of the Papacy.

"Filioque" is Latin for "and from the Son." The Catholic Niceno-Constantinopolitan creed says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. The Eastern Orthodox Niceno-Constantinopolitan creed says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. The Eastern Orthodox creed is older than the Catholic creed.

The second difference concerns the status of the Pope, the bishop of Rome. Eastern Orthodox believe that the Pope is the first among equals, but that the title is honorific and does not mean that the Pope has power over the other patriarchs. Catholics believe that the Pope has "full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered." That is, for Catholics the Pope is the head-honcho. For Orthodox he is not. This became a bigger issue when Catholics dogmatized Papal Infallibility at the First Vatican Council in 1870.

The original break included many cultural and political issues, but I think these two points are the biggest differences between the two groups today.

 

[mark46]

Catholics will say the differences are few and small. Orthodox will say the differences are many and huge. If you want to know what they think are the many and huge differences go to their forum and ask them. They will tell you all about it. You will get two ear-fulls. We are essentially the same. We share the same sacraments. We share the same Church Fathers. We just grew apart when the paths of communication grew treacherous as the Roman Empire declined. Catholics are ready for re-union. But it ain't gonna happen.

We might refer to the documents of the Joint Declaration at Revenna in 2007, along with the comments from various groups.

I agree that many Orthodox believe that the difference are huge. As a review of these documents suggest even the role of the Patriarch of Rome is not all that different. Communion at each other's churches is again being discussed in 2020.

As I recall from the last time I looked at this, it is one of the Patriarchs that is especially opposed to any further movements toward more unity.

 

[prodromos]

We are essentially the same.

Patriarch Bartholomew said "The manner in which we exist has become ontologically different
", in his address to Georgetown University.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Patriarch Bartholomew said "The manner in which we exist has become ontologically different
", in his address to Georgetown University.

If, as you say, we are ontologically different, which is to say entirely separate entities, then you get to thumb your nose at us without also thumbing your nose at yourself. Patriarch Bartholomew also said "Our love towards you is warm." I don't know what that means but it clearly is not warm from lots of Orthodox. Or maybe 'warm' as in how they might feel about the heathens.

I'm not going to unread the Fathers, toss my patristics books into the fire, or do anything which would look like there is an ontological difference between Catholics and the Orthodox. For to me there is no ontological difference between us. You can affirm your ontological difference all you want. You can reject my baptism if you want. Whatever you want. I accept you and the rest of the Orthodox as a brother even if it is not reciprocated. And from what I continually see, it isn't.

 

[zippy2006]

We might refer to the documents of the Joint Declaration at Revenna in 2007, along with the comments from various groups.

I agree that many Orthodox believe that the difference are huge. As a review of these documents suggest even the role of the Patriarch of Rome is not all that different. Communion at each other's churches is again being discussed in 2020.

As I recall from the last time I looked at this, it is one of the Patriarchs that is especially opposed to any further movements toward more unity.

The Ravenna Document has been removed from the Vatican website, but can be found here. From what I can see it acknowledges notable differences in how to understand the status of the bishop of Rome. For example:

41. Both sides agree that this canonical taxis was recognised by all in the era of the undivided Church. Further, they agree that Rome, as the Church that “presides in love” according to the phrase of St Ignatius of Antioch (To the Romans, Prologue), occupied the first place in the taxis, and that the bishop of Rome was therefore the protos among the patriarchs. They disagree, however, on the interpretation of the historical evidence from this era regarding the prerogatives of the bishop of Rome as protos, a matter that was already understood in different ways in the first millennium.​

 

[chevyontheriver]

The Ravenna Document has been removed from the Vatican website, but can be found here.

Wondering why.

 

[zippy2006]

If, as you say, we are ontologically different, which is to say entirely separate entities,...

Without reading the document at length, he seems to be saying that the Orthodox mode of being is spiritual-experiential whereas the Catholic mode of being is doctrinal-rational.

 

[prodromos]

I accept you and the rest of the Orthodox as a brother even if it is not reciprocated. And from what I continually see, it isn't.

If there is anything consistent about your attitude towards Orthodox that I have noticed, it is that you take every opportunity to make a derogatory statement regarding my brethren, always painting us in a negative light. Very 'brotherly' of you.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Without reading the document at length, he seems to be saying that the Orthodox mode of being is spiritual-experiential whereas the Catholic mode of being is doctrinal-rational.

A mode of being can differ even if the parts are of the same being.

 

[chevyontheriver]

If there is anything consistent about your attitude towards Orthodox that I have noticed, it is that you take every opportunity to make a derogatory statement regarding my brethren, always painting us in a negative light. Very 'brotherly' of you.

If, as you say, we are ontologically different, where is the 'brotherly' anyhow? Am I even a brother to the Orthodox according to the Orthodox? I can't get a very straight answer on that.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

No, you didn't get it wrong. @Yeshua HaDerekh is introducing polemics into this thread. The proper name of our Church is the Catholic Church, not the Roman Church. The idea that it is the "Roman Church" is an EO polemic used to downplay Catholics. It would be equally true to say that the Catholic Church is orthodox as to say that the Orthodox Church is catholic. It's a difference of proper nouns.

Further, the Catholic Church is not limited to Rome. There are 23 Eastern Catholic Churches which are part of the Catholic Church, do not use the Roman Rite, and accept things like Papal Primacy.

LOL, if that were the case you WOULD be Orthodox...no polemics at all...the church of Rome is not NOW limited to Rome because it broke church canons that it signed and then went into other Patriarchal territories...

 

[zippy2006]

LOL, if that were the case you WOULD be Orthodox...no polemics at all...the church of Rome is not NOW limited to Rome because it broke church canons that it signed and then went into other Patriarchal territories...

So it turns out you don't have a monopoly on catholicism, orthodoxy, or Eastern territories. So sorry to break the news to you.