Orthodox vs. Protestant belief differences?

[Silmarien]

*But by the way, there are some Protestant denominations that do believe that Faith and also Works are effective in the sanctification process, so I shouldn't generalize too much about this.

Anglicanism does, right? I never know when reading Anglicans whether it's their own personal theology or something held by the church traditionally. (I'm at the Episcopal Church right now but unconfirmed, so I don't know specifically Anglican theology too well. Does it even count as Protestant?)

Well, the "abandonment of any sense of responsibility" sounds a lot more to me like what an opponent of Protestantism would say than what it says itself. It's either a misrepresentation or a misunderstanding.

At worst, I said. I don't think that's what Sola Fide is supposed to mean, but I've seen some wild biblical interpretations, self-righteousness, and shockingly uncharitable behavior. Generally not from Lutherans or Anglicans, but I'm a little bit concerned that specifically Protestant ideas, when divorced from sound theology, lead to serious problems.

I may just not be aware of the darker side of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, though. I clash more with Protestants due to some of the anti-mysticism that pops up in certain corners.

 

[ladodgers6]

Trying to figure out which one I align more with, Orthodox or Protestant.

If anyone of sufficient knowledge can point out the salient differences.

Much obliged!

God bless~

Before I can comment. What do you mean by Orthodox?

 

[chaz491]

Trying to figure out which one I align more with, Orthodox or Protestant.

If anyone of sufficient knowledge can point out the salient differences.

Much obliged!

God bless~

Its pretty simple I think. Protestants do not believe in the church. They do not believe God prevented it from error in its teaching. I think I am correct in making this blanket statement - please correct me if I am wrong. To them the Church is a man-made organization with man-made beliefs and traditions. If they do not see it in the Bible they do not accept that it is from Christ. Catholics and Orthodox believe what their Churches teach. We believe the beliefs and traditions were established by Christ.

Protestants believe their personal interpretation of the Bible. This is why there are hundreds of different denominations - they split apart when they disagree about what the Bible teaches. They split over interpretation of the word. Consequently they have no unity of belief other than Christ is God and the Bible is His word.

There are not hundreds of different Catholic or Orthodox denominations. There are different styles of doing the same things. You can go to a Coptic Catholic Church and see a different way of doing the Mass, but the essential elements of the Mass are the same as the Roman Rite or Orthodox Rite

 

[Halbhh]

I think you should very strongly discount the differences and think of them as littler, more trivial. (We don't want to accidentally get into a legalistic mindset, even with good intentions.)

What *does* matter? Well, consider:

"
Apostles' Creed
1. I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth:

2. And in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord:

3. Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary:

4. Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead and buried: He descended into hell:

5. The third day he rose again from the dead:

6. He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty:

7. From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead:

8. I believe in the Holy Ghost:

9. I believe in the holy catholic church: the communion of saints:

10. The forgiveness of sins:

1l. The resurrection of the body:

12. And the life everlasting. Amen."

from Orthodox Creeds. A Short Exposition of Orthodox Doctrine

There is just no meaningful difference at all, in any way, anywhere, in this creed in Orthodox and Lutheran, I can tell you.... So, see? No real difference that actually matters, and we also periodically recite the Nicene and at least once per year the Anthanasian in the Lutheran church we joined a while back.

So, what matters in comparison to the basic tenets of faith? What color the pastor wears? I think no.

I've even had a very highly educated Catholic tell me my own attitude in the eucharist is an Eastern one. (though this is a distinction I don't need to know, myself, but is just showing that the likeness is essential; both are Christian. When I'm told at Eucharist that this "is" His body, that's it. No abstractions needed or even beneficial. We are already there.).

So, I don't worry about those little difference. I would instead look for things like this for picking a church:

"By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."

 

[prodromos]

No - the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church are two lungs, an eastern one and a western one, of the same Church, and the Church is in schism between its two halves over very specific structural issues.

Patriarch Bartholomew stated that Catholics and Orthodox have become ontologically different, so I don't see how we could be described as two lungs, but two quite different organs. It is a desceptive analogy because it implies we are the same body, which might sound well and good from a Catholic viewpoint but does not work from an Orthodox viewpoint .

 

[Christina C]

That source is quite hostile to the Catholic side of things, and contains some errors about actual Catholic belief and practice, but overall it does serve to rather clearly show that there is a great deal of similarity between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, and also the significant degree of hostility of Orthodoxy to Catholicism ("Roman Catholic temples"? Really?)

Perhaps this is a bit more balanced
Comparison between Orthodoxy, Protestantism & Roman Catholicism
I can't comment on the accuracy of the information about RC belief. The Protestant section is too generalist - there are so many Protestant denominations to b able to give an all-encompassing description of beliefs.
This wiki entry is also interesting.
Theological differences between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church - Wikipedia

 

[prodromos]

That source is quite hostile to the Catholic side of things, and contains some errors about actual Catholic belief and practice, but overall it does serve to rather clearly show that there is a great deal of similarity between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, and also the significant degree of hostility of Orthodoxy to Catholicism ("Roman Catholic temples"? Really?)

Father Michael Azkoul is one of those fringe characters who really does not accurately represent Orthodoxy. I'm not even sure if he is recognised as a priest in any Orthodox jurisdiction.
BTW, we Greeks refer to our church buildings as "temples", so I don't think use of the term was a sledge.

 

[Christina C]

Father Michael Azkoul is one of those fringe characters who really does not accurately represent Orthodoxy. I'm not even sure if he is recognised as a priest in any Orthodox jurisdiction.
BTW, we Greeks refer to our church buildings as "temples", so I don't think use of the term was a sledge.

Apologies - I didn't know that. Should have checked out the source more closely before posting!

 

[Halbhh]

All who believe sincerely in Christ risen, such as in the Nicene or Apostolic creeds, the living Son of God -- they are each and all my brothers and sisters in Christ -- and I could not say differently without real risk to my own salvation: "I was a stranger and you welcomed me..."

We are all His.

 

[Vicomte13]

Patriarch Bartholomew stated that Catholics and Orthodox have become ontologically different, so I don't see how we could be described as two lungs, but two quite different organs. It is a desceptive analogy because it implies we are the same body, which might sound well and good from a Catholic viewpoint but does not work from an Orthodox viewpoint .

Yep. Catholics think we're the same Church, divided by some traditions and a lot of difficult history.
Orthodox think that they are the Church, that we departed from the Church long ago, and that each difference is fundamental and profound.

I don't personally think that reconciliation will ever occur, because whatever could be gained by Christian unity does not seem to anybody to be worth the compromise.

 

[Albion]

Anglicanism does, right? I never know when reading Anglicans whether it's their own personal theology or something held by the church traditionally. (I'm at the Episcopal Church right now but unconfirmed, so I don't know specifically Anglican theology too well. Does it even count as Protestant?)

Ah, now you've done it! --addressed the breadth of Anglican thought. In short, you can find plenty of knowledgeable Anglicans on each side of that issue, and they're all comfortable in the church.

The church is technically Protestant and should be described as such if there's a need for classifying it. However, it maintains that it has preserved the essence of Catholic belief and practice while reforming what needed to have been reformed. Some like to say we're reformed Catholics and others like to say that we're both Catholic and reformed, or Catholic and Protestant. All of these descriptions seem reasonable to me.

At worst, I said.

I know. It was a lighthearted comment, but really, it is untrue to say. Anyone who does think that way about Faith just doesn't understand the principle/belief.

I don't think that's what Sola Fide is supposed to mean, but I've seen some wild biblical interpretations, self-righteousness, and shockingly uncharitable behavior.

But of course. That's the way people are. There are shockingly poor examples to be found among all denominations. The point remains, however, that no church is affirming that behavior, and that alibi for it, as a correct understanding of Sola Fide.

Generally not from Lutherans or Anglicans, but I'm a little bit concerned that specifically Protestant ideas, when divorced from sound theology, lead to serious problems.

I may just not be aware of the darker side of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, though. I clash more with Protestants due to some of the anti-mysticism that pops up in certain corners.

I do think that the challenge you've taken up and, also, put to us here is quite a big one. That's why I suggested a few posts back that if you could narrow your guidelines for us--on the Protestant side--it would help a lot. You're obviously not a beginner when it comes to these matters, so if you could say that you definitely would not consider a church that does X or practices Y or is well-known for something else, or, for that matter, that you really do want a liturgical church (which I think may be the case) we could focus on the contenders a lot better.

 

[Vicomte13]

Father Michael Azkoul is one of those fringe characters who really does not accurately represent Orthodoxy. I'm not even sure if he is recognised as a priest in any Orthodox jurisdiction.
BTW, we Greeks refer to our church buildings as "temples", so I don't think use of the term was a sledge.

Fair enough. I found his discussion of Orthodoxy to be accurate, and his hostility to Catholicism to be clear - and based on real points of distinction. I found that the points he made about the reasons for the distinction to be caricatural, and not representative of what Catholics really believe on the point that he made.

 

[SteveIndy]

Trying to figure out which one I align more with, Orthodox or Protestant.

If anyone of sufficient knowledge can point out the salient differences.

Much obliged!

God bless~

There is a small scarlet thread, I say small because Christ calls His followers a little flock, that weaves its way through Church history. Tracking that small thread is not difficult unless we get sidetracked by dominant theologies like Orthodoxy, Catholicism, or Protestantism. The first three hundred years, or so, of primitive Christianity was characterized by purity and self-sacrifice, but after Constantine and Augustine, when the Church linked arms with the world, Christianity was lost in the fog of worldliness and doctrines of men. That pure thread continued but for the most part small and undetected by the institutional Church. After being severely limited by the suppression of the Dark Ages of the Catholics and Orthodox Church it was re-discovered by those who wanted to destroy and silence it. The history books are filled with the accounts of both Catholics and Protestants mercilessly killing those who held to an undefiled doctrine of purity, they were called, during the Reformation, Anabaptist, and Radical Reformers among other things.

It really matters very little what the differences are between the Catholics, the Orthodox, or the Protestants are because they are all corrupted. Even the Anabaptist of today has been mostly silenced through corruption and for fear of persecution. Jesus states plainly, "Will I even find faith on the earth when I return." We know that a pure strain of the Church exists but it is not to be found by sampling differing denomination or sects. The truth is still only to be found through the revelation of the Holy Spirit through an earnest will. John 7:17 "When your will is to do the will of the Father then you will know." The truth that you desire is not to found so easily. Much prayer and seeking the face of God brings forth truth a small nugget at a time until you have a vast fortune, a little here and a little there until you become thoroughly convinced and thoroughly changed. If you are just looking for a religion that suits you then just close your eyes and pick one, because it doesn't matter.

 

[chaz491]

Patriarch Bartholomew stated that Catholics and Orthodox have become ontologically different, so I don't see how we could be described as two lungs, but two quite different organs. It is a desceptive analogy because it implies we are the same body, which might sound well and good from a Catholic viewpoint but does not work from an Orthodox viewpoint .

Why would we Romans care what some bizarre Patriarch thinks??? Soon we will pull you in and put you to work doing something constructive for a change

 

[chaz491]

Yep. Catholics think we're the same Church, divided by some traditions and a lot of difficult history.
Orthodox think that they are the Church, that we departed from the Church long ago, and that each difference is fundamental and profound.

I don't personally think that reconciliation will ever occur, because whatever could be gained by Christian unity does not seem to anybody to be worth the compromise.

I know for a fact that the Vatican has a large computer in the basement which has a database with information on all Protestants who have accepted Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior

 

[Silmarien]

I do think that the challenge you've taken up and, also, put to us here is quite a big one. That's why I suggested a few posts back that if you could narrow your guidelines for us--on the Protestant side--it would help a lot. You're obviously not a beginner when it comes to these matters, so if you could say that you definitely would not consider a church that does X or practices Y or is well-known for something else, or, for that matter, that you really do want a liturgical church (which I think may be the case) we could focus on the contenders a lot better.

Oh, I wasn't the OP. I'd just jumped in because I've been doing a fair amount of research into Orthodoxy and know that the differences go much deeper than Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide.

Myself, I got knocked over the head with Russian literature after previously rejecting Christianity entirely, so I've been hearing the siren call of Orthodoxy for years without realizing that that's what it was. I live in that corner of liberal theology where existentialism veers straight into mysticism, so right now I'm kind of stuck halfway between liberal Anglicanism and Orthodoxy. Though I'm more worried about shedding my secularism than officially picking a church, and it's probably pretty Protestant of me to not think that those two things go together.

 

[Halbhh]

There is a small scarlet thread, I say small because Christ calls His followers a little flock, that weaves its way through Church history. Tracking that small thread is not difficult unless we get sidetracked by dominant theologies like Orthodoxy, Catholicism, or Protestantism. The first three hundred years, or so, of primitive Christianity was characterized by purity and self-sacrifice, but after Constantine and Augustine, when the Church linked arms with the world, Christianity was lost in the fog of worldliness and doctrines of men. That pure thread continued but for the most part small and undetected by the institutional Church. After being severely limited by the suppression of the Dark Ages of the Catholics and Orthodox Church it was re-discovered by those who wanted to destroy and silence it. The history books are filled with the accounts of both Catholics and Protestants mercilessly killing those who held to an undefiled doctrine of purity, they were called, during the Reformation, Anabaptist, and Radical Reformers among other things.

It really matters very little what the differences are between the Catholics, the Orthodox, or the Protestants are because they are all corrupted. Even the Anabaptist of today has been mostly silenced through corruption and for fear of persecution. Jesus states plainly, "Will I even find faith on the earth when I return." We know that a pure strain of the Church exists but it is not to be found by sampling differing denomination or sects. The truth is still only to be found through the revelation of the Holy Spirit through an earnest will. John 7:17 "When your will is to do the will of the Father then you will know." The truth that you desire is not to found so easily. Much prayer and seeking the face of God brings forth truth a small nugget at a time until you have a vast fortune, a little here and a little there until you become thoroughly convinced and thoroughly changed. If you are just looking for a religion that suits you then just close your eyes and pick one, because it doesn't matter.

I remember thinking as I was reading about theologies in a very broad way that the anabaptists were the most correct, but....it turns out that doesn't matter, very often, if one even knows it.

Why? Because no church that I know of, from my conversations with individual members in different cities and different denominations is actually able to make it's members adhere mentally to it's own official theology. Really. They don't. I know the people I talked with didn't, several dozen people in diverse places and churches.

What happens instead? The members only vaguely have some theology ideas in common past the essential key things, such as given in such as the Apostolic Creed. For other points, like infant baptism, etc., etc., the range inside any individual church is all across the spectrum.

Really.

It's easier to find 2 that agree from different denominations very often than 2 in the same church, about a given set of several points. Ok, that's slightly hyperbolic, but not by much. It's definitely true all churches have a big range of beliefs in them, about things that seem to matter at times, but are not inside the creeds.

So, you can find anabaptists in the Lutheran church, etc. It's routine. I'm not saying they know they are anabaptists. I don't even know if I am, and I think it's correct, lol. I mean I would not chance baptizing my kid until they can choose, but simultaneously I don't know with total certainty the baptized as infants aren't fine in that way.

And that's just one thing. In a church, in my experience, it's very hard to find 2 people that agree on any 10 doctrinal questions past the most essential basics, like in the Nicene creed. Past the creed, they are just all over the map.

Often it's clearly not crucial but might only at moments become weighty if at a moment it can affect faith. Usually such points don't. Like one believing the Earth is young, and their close friend they love believes the Universe is 13.8 bn years old, and they are arm in arm, because neither one of them is putting their faith on that point at all.

And that's fine. These things only matter when a situation more like 1 Cor 8 is happening, and then it's about not arguing, but being harmonious. I know God is able to save someone baptized as an infant even while I wouldn't do that to my own child.

All of this is just to say that His followers are in all churches, and the doctrines cannot stop them.

Here's better wording: a Lutheran baptized as an infant can have the same true baptism inside later in life as any anabaptist, because of how they truly internalize the baptism in their thoughts. Here's an analogy: someone in the desert in a drought with no water available to use but for drinking could still be baptized, just by truly internalizing the baptism in their own mind. The particulars of our situation can't keep us from God. Faith rescues us, by His grace.

 

[Vicomte13]

I know for a fact that the Vatican has a large computer in the basement which has a database with information on all Protestants who have accepted Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior

Whoa! DUDE, they let you see that? Cool! I was only admitted to the Antechamber of The Third Sanctum, but that computer's way, WAY down in the 6th Subcircle, past The Fourth Transverse Atrium! You have to, like, have had The Special Chrismation (3rd Rite), to even get past The Suborbital Portal of the 1st Transverse! So how did you do that? Are you descended from one of the Cardinals?

(And did your cilice set off the metal detector on the First Sub-Secretum? It took me a month to get the smell of the Special Passage Oil out of my tefillin!)

Ipso facto actus reus [nudge, wink]. [Know what I mean? Know what I mean?]

 

[Antari Zephyr]

I actually began to pray very honestly before and after reading The Word OF God, speaking it, and so on. I've come to understand The Word Of God, Jesus Christ Himself, far better after doing that. I didn't even begin doing that until I just rejected the whole denominational thing. I was always taken to Baptist churches by my parents in the past. Now I just, for the lack of a better word, comprehend it better than before. I mean, Jesus wouldn't split The Word Of God into multiple denominations. So, I don't know what each one does. I know different things about different ones, but when it comes to having a Relationship With The Lord Jesus Christ Himself so as to reach The Holy Father God In Heaven, and praying Through The Holy Spirit Within, well, being nondenominational has helped me out far more. Pray for understanding of The Word Of God through The Holy Spirit within you when you read. You just might, as many have, come to understand the true meaning behind so many things which denominational stuff doesn't cover. I'd rather listen to The Holy Spirit than any church of "this" or "that." I still agree with a lot of what Baptists do, not all of it, but a lot. I still have denominational friends. It's just that my reading of it is understanding it Through The Holy Spirit and what He shows me. Often He uses events in my own life, filled with many times where I've come close to dying and so on, to explain things to me. Often He will tell me what to say, and other times I'll be writing something, but haven't prayed (now and then I forget, for I'm not perfect, though it is rare for me to forget to pray first), and He will tell me "erase that and start over, word it in the way I say to." I don't her Him at all times, no, but when I do, I tend to stop what I'm doing and begin writing. That's one good thing about being unable to work, despite wanting to work, since you have so much time to write down or record things in voice recorders. I then assemble these which are on the same subject, and let everyone know. I don't keep it to myself either. I let it be known in public, though I do not force it on anyone. If they dislike Christ, they can scroll away. Yet if I kept it just with my friends, would it reach those who need Him? Or would only those with Him already hear it?

As for hearing The Holy Spirit. Not everyone has conversations with Him, for we all have different Fruits Of The Spirit. However, we all tend to feel Him sometimes. I'll go all day without hearing, then suddenly it happens. It's hard to describe. I don't hear it like I do a person completely, though the words are there, but I also feel words spoken to me, become at peace, my mind stops being so distracted, everything becomes clear, clearer than before my mind was clouded by the doctors (the bad ones that started it, not the good ones trying to help me). I also know it is from Him, not from evil, for when younger, over a decade ago, I became involved in some things that caused me to hear evil spirits. I had witnesses, my entire family, so it wasn't just me. With The Holy Spirit, you never feel afraid, worried, or negative in any manner, unlike when evil speaks to you, where you will feel something negative. So since I have known both, I can easily tell when it's The Holy Spirit. The amount of times I've been told something, then told to open my Bible, only to find exactly what I was just told, is amazing. I also feel when something is bad. I don't just feel quilt, but rather like I have armor on, and a hammer just struck it. I'll feel the hit, but not the pain. So if I feel under attack and continue to go ahead, I begin to feel like I'm being protected only by The Holy Spirit, which is true, and will feel it conformed to my spirit, along with there being a point where it's like someone strong is trying to squeeze my neck in, or my chest in, but can't, though I'll feel pressure. This eliminated my "is it okay to" sort of thing. I still recommend asking since we don't all experience it in the same way, having different Fruits Of The Spirit, but nowadays I know when something I do is not right, or is good. I bind evil immediately when awakening, as well as before sleeping, and have a special prayer for waking and sleeping, as well as for before I do anything with this world at all. This understanding has eliminated old things I was once addicted to. Completely. It has rendered them less than ashes. So now I find much less tempts me, and I can resist all temptations. Of course we all have temptations and we all have certain ones that tempt us more than other temptations do to other people. All of the sexual temptations are gone for me, now. Thank Jesus Christ and The Holy Father God for that. I was not always able to just not care at all about those types of things. Money, becoming rich and wanting stuff and more stuff, that's also gone.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

There is a small scarlet thread, I say small because Christ calls His followers a little flock, that weaves its way through Church history. Tracking that small thread is not difficult unless we get sidetracked by dominant theologies like Orthodoxy, Catholicism, or Protestantism. The first three hundred years, or so, of primitive Christianity was characterized by purity and self-sacrifice, but after Constantine and Augustine, when the Church linked arms with the world, Christianity was lost in the fog of worldliness and doctrines of men. That pure thread continued but for the most part small and undetected by the institutional Church. After being severely limited by the suppression of the Dark Ages of the Catholics and Orthodox Church it was re-discovered by those who wanted to destroy and silence it. The history books are filled with the accounts of both Catholics and Protestants mercilessly killing those who held to an undefiled doctrine of purity, they were called, during the Reformation, Anabaptist, and Radical Reformers among other things.

It really matters very little what the differences are between the Catholics, the Orthodox, or the Protestants are because they are all corrupted. Even the Anabaptist of today has been mostly silenced through corruption and for fear of persecution. Jesus states plainly, "Will I even find faith on the earth when I return." We know that a pure strain of the Church exists but it is not to be found by sampling differing denomination or sects. The truth is still only to be found through the revelation of the Holy Spirit through an earnest will. John 7:17 "When your will is to do the will of the Father then you will know." The truth that you desire is not to found so easily. Much prayer and seeking the face of God brings forth truth a small nugget at a time until you have a vast fortune, a little here and a little there until you become thoroughly convinced and thoroughly changed. If you are just looking for a religion that suits you then just close your eyes and pick one, because it doesn't matter.

Can you point to any figures or movements that represent the true Church from the second to third centuries? While we can see a notable difference between Pre-nicene and ante Nicene Christendom, to suggest there was a total disconnect or that the character of Christians after Nicaea must automatically be called into question is simply untrue. What about Athanasius? Gregory of Nyssa/Nazianzus? Maximos the Confessor? Anthony? Benedict? Gregory the Great? John Chrysostom? Anselm? Plus many many more? You mention Augustine but his is an example of just how powerful Christianity is. He gave up his licentious lifestyle and job in order to become a Bishop and serve the Church. Let's not neglect his blessed mother either who is a great example of the piety of "Catholic" Christians.

I would really like to know who you consider within the history of Christianity to be a true Christian. Please be specific, names, dates and places. Thanks.