Orthodox

Polycarp1 said:

Forgive me, Gary, but if you believe that, you are heretical by definition of the Church, which holds to the Council of Chalcedon decision defining the Theotokos doctrine. (I hasten to add that I don't say that to insult, but to bring to your attention what I understand to be an error in your thought vis-à-vis what the Church teaches.

Click to expand...

DreamTheater said:

I have read quite a bit of what Protestants have against Catholics, Catholics have against Protestants, Orthodox have against Catholics, but I have read almost nothing at all about what Catholics have against Orthodoxs.

So I ask of you, why do Catholics think that Orthodoxs are wrong or incorrect in their thinking? The Orthodox faith claims that the Catholic Church split from them, and of course the Catholic Church claims the opposite. What evidence do we have to back up this claim? Any information or links would be appreciated.

Of course, I'd ask any information you have to be presented in a respectful manner.

To my Orthodox brothers and sisters that come here on a regular basis, please do not view this as an attack on your religion. I am very ignorant when it comes to Catholic-Orthodox relations and wish to learn as much as I can. Any questions I have about the Orthodox faith, I will come directly to you. Please understand I am only trying to better educate myself.

Thanks in advance.

Click to expand...

Skripper said:

Neither Catholics nor Orthodox believe that Mary was "responsible" for Christ's divinity. That's not what the doctrine of Theotokos means. It simply means that the two natures of Christ cannot be divided/sparated; it means that Mary gave birth to one divine Person, not merely to a "nature" and that it is, therefore, incorrect that Mary gave birth to Christ's human "nature" only. Mothers give birth to babies, to persons, not merely "natures." This is not to imply or suggest, as many mistakenly conclude, that if the doctrine of Theotokos is correct then this must somehow mean that Mary in some way "preceded" God on some eternal, cosmic timeline . . . no.

Click to expand...

garydench said:

So do Catholics and Orthodox differ over the Theotokos doctrine at all, then? Or was I mistaken there?

Click to expand...

Rising_Suns said:

Yes, I find most of our differences to be mostly in semantics. For example;

1. Instead of "purgaotry", they say "state of purification after death" (same thing)

2. Instead of saying "spiritual" and "phsysical", the Orthodox say "Created" and "Uncreated"

3. Instead of "Original Sin", they say that all man is born into a fallen nature with no personal fault (same deal)

4. Instead of "Transubstantiation", they say that the Eucharist becomes the actual flesh and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, but do not define it (same thing; it's a mystery)

5. Instead of "Immaculate Conception", they say that Mary was removed of sin at some point in her life.

6. Instead of saying the Holy Spirit procedes from the Father and the Son, they say from the Father alone. We both recognize that the Holy Spirit procedes through the Son as well, with the Father as the ultimate originator.

Click to expand...

garydench said:

So do Catholics and Orthodox differ over the Theotokos doctrine at all, then? Or was I mistaken there?

Click to expand...

Skripper said:

Poly,

With all due respect, I had already pointed out Gary's mistake . . . no reason to accuse him of heresy.

Click to expand...

Polycarp1 said:

Gary, my apologies -- as I tried to make clear, that was not intended to be an accusation but to point you in the direction that the Church teaches. If I failed in that attempt and offended you, I deeply regret it.

Skripper, when I began composing my response (which I was interrupted in doing), your post was not yet "up"; Gary's was the last post in the thread.

Click to expand...