Why did the Councils choose to permit marriage for their clerics, whereas the catholics did not? Could it be somehow related to Matthew 19:12?
> the Councils choose to permit marriage for their clerics
Did they? It was established tradition before Catholics decided to change it because Pope wanted more power over the Church. It's not about choosing differently, it's about keeping the tradition unchanged.
Yeah, and he was technically first among equals, but practically Byzantine vassal, and had no aspirations for any kind of political power. Papal influence started to grew in 9-10th centuries, when they were used by Carolingians to gain legitimacy to the rule, and by 11th century Popes started to think of themselves as supreme rules of Christendom. So they changed the Church to create efficient and centralized organization, supra-state above other states. They stopped to care about tradition by that time.
>efficient and centralized organization
How is that bad?
Yes I'm Catholic and no I'm not saying "but that's good you schismatic bastard." I'm wanting to know what you mean by including those terms.
I love learning about my Orthodox brothers and their beliefs, especially when I hear we have similar practices or even the same ones and I never knew we did before then.
> How is that bad?
It's not bad per se, but it's bad when a Church prioritize power over tradition and change its core doctrines just to appeal to mass superstitions (purgatory, limbo, Mary's conception, papal superiority, papal infallibility, etc.), while distancing itself from their brothers more and more. In that sense Protestantism is Catholicism par excellence, with its disregard of tradition.
Along the rough lines, Orthodox assert that there are instances where soul's state in death can be changed via divine liturgy, prayers from the living etc.
Concept of purgatory is absent, yeah.
Let me cite wikipedia for you
> The Orthodox Church does not believe in purgatory (a place of purging), that is, the inter-mediate state after death in which the souls of the saved (those who have not received temporal punishment for their sins) are purified of all taint preparatory to entering into Heaven, where every soul is perfect and fit to see God.
> Also, the Orthodox Church does not believe in indulgences as remissions from purgatoral punishment. Both purgatory and indulgences are inter-corrolated theories, unwitnessed in the Bible or in the Ancient Church, and when they were enforced and applied they brought about evil practices at the expense of the prevailing Truths of the Church.
> Do you mean Orthodox believe she was born with sin?
Yes, why not? She's surely not considered innately sinless, like regular human being. There is no established doctrine though, just like there was no in Catholicism until 19th century.
>unwitnessed in the Bible or in the Ancient Church, and when they were enforced and applied they brought about evil practices at the expense of the prevailing Truths of the Church
Okay, pretty sure you added that part. I don't know, it just sounds, "not-Wikipedia-y."
IIRC, her being born sinless was commonly held as true but only really finalized as objectively true then because it became a point of contention around that time and needed an official statement. Any more scholared Catholics have a better answer than I could give this?
Also assuming you're the same anon who compared Catholic to Protestants earlier, doesn't saying Mary was a sinner (and denying purgatory but that's more like you guys have the concept but you just don't do much with it) make Orthodox more like Protestants?
> Okay, pretty sure you added that part. I don't know, it just sounds, "not-Wikipedia-y."
They cited it themselves - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purgatory#Eastern_Orthodox .
> doesn't saying Mary was a sinner (and denying purgatory but that's more like you guys have the concept but you just don't do much with it) make Orthodox more like Protestants?
She wasn't "sinner" but he had the ability to sin, in contrast with Jesus. And yes, in some things Protestants made a full circle and came closer to the original teachings of the Church. But I doubt Protestant and Orthodox Mariology actually that similar.
Ah now I see it. Yeah when you greentexted that I thought it was from the actual Wikipedia entry, not a quote cited therein. Makes MUCH more sense now. Still disagree, however, but hey, Catholic.
And Catholics liken Mary to Eve pre-Fall, sinless and made without sin. So, actually, now that I think about it, sounds like you guys say "well she could've, but that's about it, not saying she did or anything" and it's not like the Catholic understanding eschews that thought entirely (AFAIK) if we believe her to be sinless like pre-Fall Eve, who did end up sinning.
Also, Protestants see Mary as how Jesus entered the world and nothing more. It's not Gerry reverent in the slightest. She just had the baby and that's the end of her purpose to them. Needless to say Catholics don't like that and find it disrespectful to the New Eve and New Ark of the Covenant.
Not that anon but the Orthodox idea of original (ancestral) sin is different. The finer points of these differences are go over my head but but I know that the result is that there is no limbo in Orthodoxy, nor is Mary having ancestral sin that big a deal.
Priest marriage in the Catholic church isn't considered a doctrinal issue, but a discipline.
honestly if you read between the lines the church in Rome and the church in Constantinople did not see eye to eye even during the early church councils, and they both ended up interpreting the decisions in ways that benefited their point of view. Despite the lack of a schism they became different in many respects from early on. Politics is what finally forced them to acknowledge they had gone in different directions.
also this chart is nonsense to anyone with even the most basic understanding of Jewish and Christian history