Question About Orthodoxy

[JSynon]

Greetings,

I am just curious as to what the beliefs of Orthodoxy are that are different from the beliefs of other forms of Christianity.

 

[pnotc]

There are quite a few differences with both Protestantism and Catholicism. I'll break down the major differences & similarities to Catholicism, which will probably show most of the differences with Protestantism as well.

Differences w/ Catholicism:
1) Rejection of papal supremacy and infallibility
2) National/regional churches under the guidance of bishops
3) More mystical approach to theology & worship - for instance, Catholicism affirms transubstantiation as a technical term for what happens to the elements of the Eucharist. Orthodoxy believes a similar process occurs, but is content to call it a "mystery" and not overly define it.
4) In my opinion (take it for what its worth), Orthodoxy is more traditional & conservative than Catholicism in respects to the preservation of the faith

Similarities w/ Catholicism:
1) Veneration of Saints and the Virgin Mary (she is normally called Theotokos by the Orthodox - means God-bearer)
2) Reliance on Tradition - extra-biblical authorities including Ecumenical Councils and Church Fathers
3) Sacramental & liturgical worship

Those are the major areas. There is definitely a big difference in the use of religious imagery between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, with the Orthodox venerating icons. I'm not overly familiar with Catholic theology in this area, so I'm not really qualified to expand on that. I'm sure there are others here who can and will happily do so.

 

[Moros]

http://www.geocities.com/blackshirt486/differences.html

 

[JSynon]

Thanks for the information!

I have a few questions...

Why must they rely on man-made traditions?
Why do they believe in the Assumption?
Triclavianism - Does it really matter?
What are prayer ropes?
Do they have their own translation of the Holy Bible?

Thanks and God bless!

 

[gzt]

Why must you rely on man-made Bibles?
Because the Tradition says it happened, just as the New Testament writers drew more information from Tradition about the translation of Enoch.
Pass.
A string of wool knots with a cross on it used to help one keep track of how many prayers one has said. In the Orthodox tradition, one usually prays some variation of the Jesus Prayer [Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner].
No, but we use the Septuagint, as that was what many of the early Christians used as the Old Testament rather than the Protestant Old Testament.

 

[JSynon]

Why must you rely on man-made Bibles?

I believe the bible is the inspired word of God, not word of man.

just as the New Testament writers drew more information from Tradition about the translation of Enoch.

Please forgive me if I misunderstood, but where is the book of Enoch mentioned in the New Testament?

No, but we use the Septuagint, as that was what many of the early Christians used as the Old Testament rather than the Protestant Old Testament.

You use an English translation of the Septuagint I presume. Even though many of the early Christians used this translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, wouldn't the original Hebrew translated into English for the Protestant Old Testament be just as accurate?

Thanks for the comments!

 

[Michael G]

Thanks for the information!
Why must they rely on man-made traditions?

1 Tim. 3:14-15

14: I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these instructions to you so that,
15: if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

St. Paul says the Church and it's traditions, which are handed down to us directly from Christ himself, are the Pillar and Foundation of all Truth.

 

[Oblio]

I believe the bible is the inspired word of God, not word of man

We also believe that Tradition, including the Holy Scriptures, are the inspired word of God, not word of man.

 

[countrymousenc]

Thanks for the information!

I have a few questions...

Why must they rely on man-made traditions?

Welcome to TAW, JSynon.

There is a difference between man-made traditions and Church-made (apostolic) Holy Tradition. The issue is authority. Israel, in the period leading up to and during Jesus' years of ministry, was ruled over by Idumean kings (the Herods) and the high priesthood was a purchased office. Israel had become divided into parties (Pharisees, Sadducees, Zealots, etc.), each of whom interpreted the Law in its own way. That is why Christ called their traditions "traditions of men." Orthodox Holy Tradition, however, is founded only on what Christ and His Apostles preached, wrote, and taught, and which has been preserved by the Church.

I hope that helps.

Dianne-Mary

 

[Akathist]

Triclavianism - Does it really matter?

http://www.geocities.com/blackshirt486/differences.html[/url]]Triclavianism -
Orthodox believe 4 nails were used to affix the Lord to His Cross. One in each arm, one in each foot. Catholics believe 3 nails were used. One in each hand, and one through both feet, directly to the Cross, with no foot-board, or, failing that; a small block at the bottom. The belief in a three nail Crucifixion is Triclavianism. We believe in a three bar Cross. The first bar being the sign which was hung over Jesus' head (depicted in Catholic imagery as saying: "Jesus Christ, King of the Jews." Orthodox Iconography usually says the more appropriate: "King of Glory"), the horizontal beam which His arms were attached to, and a tilted foot-board which His feet were nailed to.

Holy tradition says that at the moment of Christ's death, His legs went into spasm causing the board to be forced up on the right and down on the left, creating a diagonal direction of the foot board and, at the same time, showing the judgment of the two thieves, the one on the right inheriting Paradise and the one on the left condemning himself to hell. Hence, the tilted foot-board in Orthodox Iconography. The three bar Cross was also used by St. Andrew in evangelizing Russia. Legend has it that he built a life sized Cross on a hill facing Kiev and showed it to the people, pointing to the foot board, and saying: "Those on the right side of Christ will go to Heaven - those on the left, to hell."

Eastern-Rite Catholics also have a three bar Cross, but the foot board is horizontal. These horizontal foot board depictions appeared much later.

This would not be much of a big deal if tradition did not play such a huge part in the Church.

I want to answer you about the "Assumption" but I am not sure if you are discussing the Assumption of Jesus or of Theotokos. The Assumption of Jesus is clearly described in the book of Acts.

Regarding the Assumption. This is not dogma in Orthodoxy. (meaning, it is not a belief necessary for salvation.)

So, personal opinions of this is all anyone can state officially. There are many references to the Assumption of Theotokos. I am still learning but here is my current level of understanding:

Mary (Theotokos) bore the fetus/infant Jesus. Her body became therefore the Ark of the "new covenant". (Or a temple). Think about it. Her body held inside of it the Creator of the Universe, God Himself. She is and was totally pure otherwise this could not have occured.

Orthodox (and RCC) do not worship Holy Mary. She is "venerated", meaning we especially love her.

I believe that her body had to be incorruptable by death. (It would not have disintegrated back to dust.) It would have been too easy for human's to worship someone who never ever every decomposed in any fashion at all. (Some saints have relics, but they are bone fragments, etc, and not the body whole.)

So, Theotokos was assumed body and spirit into Heaven upon her earthly death. (She was human after all, therefore she really died.)

 

[xenia]

Hi JSynon, welcome to TAW!

The reference to the book of Enoch is found in the New Testament book of Jude, verse 14.

In Christ Xenia

 

[ufonium2]

Even though many of the early Christians used this translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, wouldn't the original Hebrew translated into English for the Protestant Old Testament be just as accurate?

Not if it's missing several books, which it is. The only way it can be seen as better is if you think that Hebrew is an inherently holy language, which it's not.

Edit: gzt, you just made Coke shoot out of my nose with your "man-made Bibles" remark. Reminds me of the bumper sticker that says "My Church wrote your Bible."

 

[JSynon]

Thank you all for the responses.

Is the book of Enoch considered inspired by Orthodoxy?

Not if it's missing several books, which it is.

The Septuagint is not missing several books?

Does Orthodoxy believe in salvation by works, such as sacraments?
Church Dogma is required belief for salvation? What are some of the most important official Church Dogma's?

 

[countrymousenc]

The Septuagint is not missing several books?

The Masoretic text, which is the Hebrew text used by Protestant translators, does not have all of the books that are included in the Septuagint.

Does Orthodoxy believe in salvation by works, such as sacraments?

The Orthodox Church teaches salvation by faith hand-in-hand with works. To a Protestant, that sounds as though it nullifies grace. After all, grace excludes all opportunity for boasting, as St. Paul wrote. Here's why the Orthodox teaching does not nullify grace. Christ told His disciples to be perfect, even as our Father in Heaven is perfect. We can't do that, so we have to rely on God's grace to make up for our weakness. However, with the help of the Holy Spirit, our Comforter, we can get better and better. In fact, if we don't, we have no evidence of our faith or repentance. Remember that the servant who buried his talent rather than increasing it was turned away by his master.

And yes, we believe in the sacramental nature of holy baptism, and the Lord's Supper (the Eucharist, which means giving thanks), of holy orders (ordination), chrismation (the gift of the Holy Spirit), marriage, etc. In fact, the Church requires that we recognize 7 sacraments, but teaches that sacramental activities are not limited to those seven. We see the sacraments as gifts God has given to His Church through which He gives us His grace. Salvation, to us, is not a one-time forensic event in the life of a Christian, but ongoing, daily, and practical. The Holy Orthodox Faith ministers to the whole person, because we view human life, body and soul, as precious and sacred, as the Church was taught by Christ and the Apostles.

 

[Orthosdoxa]

BTW, sacraments are things that God does that we receive the benefit of, not things that we do to score points with God.

Welcome to TAW.

LK

 

[JSynon]

The Masoretic text, which is the Hebrew text used by Protestant translators, does not have all of the books that are included in the Septuagint.

What books are in the Septuagint that are not in the Protestant translation?
The Hebrew Scriptures were preserved and Canonized by Israel, would not they have the proper books included in the Canon? Why the added books in the Septuagint that were not in the Hebrew Canon?

The Orthodox Church teaches salvation by faith hand-in-hand with works. To a Protestant, that sounds as though it nullifies grace.

I can fully understand that because works are proof that you have faith. "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." James 2:26
When was the book of Enoch written and why was it not included in the Christian canon?

Thanks so much for your time!

 

[ufonium2]

What books are in the Septuagint that are not in the Protestant translation?

1[font=Arial, Helvetica]st[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica] and [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]2nd[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica] [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Maccabees[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica], [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Baruch[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica], [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Tobit[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica], [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Judith[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica], [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]The Wisdom of Solomon[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica], [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Sirach[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica] (Ecclesiasticus), [font=Arial, Helvetica]1st[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica] and [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]2nd Esdras[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica], [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Prayer of Manasseh[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica], [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Psalm 151[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica] and [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]3rd Maccabees, also [/font]additions to Esther, and [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Susanna[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica] and [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Bel and the Dragon[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica] which are included in Daniel.[/font]

The Hebrew Scriptures were preserved and Canonized by Israel, would not they have the proper books included in the Canon? Why the added books in the Septuagint that were not in the Hebrew Canon?

First, you should know that the Septuagint is the older version of the OT, so differences between it and the Masoretic text do not mean things were added to the Septuagint, but that they were taken away for the Masoretic. The Masoretic was assembled by Jews after Christ's death. These people did not believe Jesus was the Messiah, so they removed parts of their scripture that pointed to Jesus as the Messiah. Coincidentally, the texts they removed also support many Catholic and Orthodox practices such as veneration of saints, so it was convenient for Protestant leaders to ignore these books based on the fact that post New-Testament Jews were ignoring them as well. How much sense does that make when you really think about it?

 

[Oblio]

I can fully understand that because works are proof that you have faith.

They are not just proof of our faith but they are also the means by which we strengthen and grow in theosois, conforming to the likeness of our Creator. Faith and works are partners in our salvation.

 

[Akathist]

Regarding what doctrines are necessary for salvation:

My first thought in answer was the "Nicean Creed" however, that is not a sufficient answer. Salvation is a mystery and it it worked out on many levels. On one hand we are saved through the life death and resurrection that Jesus did, on the other, however, in a addition, we are saved through the church and sacraments, and yet salvation is personal and is worked out internally through faith and works.

My Priest said this is the answer: "I was saved, I am being saved and I will be saved."

This is part of Orthodoxy, everything is not legalistic and black and white. There are a lot of ambiguities and mysteries.

In the end, only God knows about the salvation of anyone.

 

[JSynon]

Coincidentally, the texts they removed also support many Catholic and Orthodox practices such as veneration of saints, so it was convenient for Protestant leaders to ignore these books based on the fact that post New-Testament Jews were ignoring them as well. How much sense does that make when you really think about it?

That is very interesting. I'll have to look into that more.

So the Septuagint includes all of the pre New Testament Jewish Scripture?
Are there any books that Orthodox considers inspired and Protestant's don't?