Without shitflinging, let's talk Catholicism vs. Orthodoxy

File: 2456457542745745.jpg (73KB, 625x468px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 625x468px

?

The split between the two occurred when the Byzantium Ruler placed himself at the head of the church in the East while the Pope remained head of the church in the Western Roman Empire.
The Byzantine church is what we now know as Orthodox: they separated the Son from the Trinity stating that the Holy Spirit only comes from the Father, this is what we know as the Filioque Clause. They also believed that the use of idols led one into temptation (obviously they now have idols similar to the Roman Catholic church now, but for a couple of centuries they had none)
The churches were completely separate by 1054.
the only one that has "claims" to the apostolic succession is the Roman Catholic, the orthodox had the ruler of the Byzantium empire. Honestly I have no idea how it works today as I'm not religious but there's some of the historical background for ya.

>>65401
basically today the Orthodox church functions as effectively independent bishoprics united by a common creed, and Patriarchs acting as sort of "mini-popes" but really without any of the same authority

>>65401
I've never heard the Orthodox side; however, given that tradition holds, with some evidence, that Peter and Paul were the leaders of the Church in Rome, that seems like the defining element of apostolic succession. I know Protestants like to hand wave the evidence that these two were in Rome, but that's done because Protestants don't care about history. My understanding is that Orthodoxy is not dismissive of evidence like this, but given this, I don't know how they get around this issue.

File: orthodox priest.jpg (68KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 480x640px

>>64872
All I know is Orthodox priest look like wizards

>>64872

Both Church share the same first thousand years of apostolic succession. There were 5 Patriarchs and Rome was one of them and split after the other 4 denied his supremacy. Those other 4 Patriarchates still exist in the Orthodox faith(with more added) so by way of majority I would say Orthodoxy is THE Church and the Roman Catholic Church started in 1054, but I also understand why Rome would say otherwise. Rome was given an elevated status in the first place, and the Pope is considered to have a certain primacy(not supremacy) because Peter was the leader of the Apostles(but he wasn't considered infallible and the Pauline texts more than prove that). I think both sides have a case but I think part of it has to do with Rome being upset about Constantinople being elevated to such a high place by degree of Constantinople when Rome had "more of a rightful claim" historically to be the center of Christendom.

>>65541
>degree of Constantinople

*Decree of Constantine

>>65541
But it's more complex than a simple vote because of the fact that Rome had primacy. Also, keep in mind that infallibility does not mean everything Peter or other popes says are always true. It's in the context of the magisterium, and essentially the Pauline texts and Acts function as an illustration of this point. That is basically how the Catholic Church still works today.

But given that even Anglicans acknowledge the primacy of Rome, I don't see how a Church can claim to be the one Church without the Roman patriarch.

>>65401
>the Byzantium Ruler placed himself at the head of the church in the East
What? No.

>They also believed that the use of idols led one into temptation (obviously they now have idols similar to the Roman Catholic church now, but for a couple of centuries they had none)
This is not true. The extremes of the iconomachy lasted only for a few years.

> they separated the Son from the Trinity stating that the Holy Spirit only comes from the Father
The Orthodox didn't separate anything. All the Christians believed it the way the Orthodox believe it. There was some inconsistency in the translation from Greek to Latin, but the Latins knew that and treated it as such. Even the Pope was denouncing the filioqve up until the "schism".
I put schism in "" because it never actually happened. It was a story made up later.

>The churches were completely separate by 1054.
This is not true.


Your whole post is wrong.

>>64872
Neither honestly. A lot of what was discussed in the various councils had little to do with the Christianity of Saint Paul. Which in and of itself was different from the Judaism of Christ.

Just because they hold titles that have been passed down from the Apostles doesn't mean much.

Also you are forgetting about the Armenian Apostolic Church which claims its legitimacy from the apostles Bartholomew and Thaddeus

That being said, it was agreed that Rome takes primacy in the Pentarchy, but the Byzantines argued that with the transfer of the Imperial capital from Rome to Constantinople, Constantinople also took primacy.

There is no such thing as "apostolic succession" mentioned in the Bible. Peter was the founder of the church, that much is true, but there's absolutely nothing about his "successors" and the institute of papacy.

>>65639
That's because for the first 100 years Christianity was a apocalyptic religion the first and second generations were sure the end of the world was coming soon and Christ was going to return.

>>65583
>But given that even Anglicans acknowledge the primacy of Rome, I don't see how a Church can claim to be the one Church without the Roman patriarch

I think Orthodox understand the primacy of Rome very well. It's not as though the Pope is just "some guy" to us. He's a Bishop and that means more to us than it does to Protestants, and it always will. If the West and East ever joined again I don't think the Pope would be any less of a prestigious office. He can have his primacy and his Vatican, he would just have no authority over the other Patriarchs, which is how it should have always been in the first place.

>>65639
>implying the Bible is germane to this discussion
The Bible didn't exist for 300 years. Tradition of the Church is what matters. The doctrine of the Trinity isn't mentioned in the Bible either. That doesn't mean it's not true.

>>65633
Why do people always try to force this distinction between Paul and Jesus? The idea that Paul had different ideas and Christianized non-Christian concepts does not make it an either-or proposition.

>>65688
>citation needed
The Gospels do not indicate this. Paul hints at it, but speaks on his own authority, not Christ's. Even if he did believe that, it doesn't change what we know of what Jesus said.

I have no doubt some Christians believed this, but that doesn't mean they were misinterpreting or guessing.

The greek orthodox church IS the catholic church

Catholic comes from greek katolikos. The schism was political in nature because the pope in the west crowned charlemagne the new roman emperor when that title already existed in the east

>>65697
But what would that even mean to unite, when most of the Orthodox are basically autonomous autocephalous.

Just they would have the same calendar?
Could the deeper theological disputes be resolved?

File: Gregor_Palamas.jpg (89KB, 405x600px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 405x600px

Bro, do you even φιλοkαλία ?

>>65736
>The Bible didn't exist for 300 years.
This is not true. Both the epistles and later the gospels were written within 100 years of the crucifixion, the ecumenical councils didn't "invent" the Bible, they merely put a canon stamp on already established scriptures.

The problem with oral tradition is that since there are no written accounts of it, the church can literally make shit up and pass it as tradition dating to apostolic times. Which is exactly what happened with priest celibate, indulgences, purgatory etc.

I like the Lutheran approach the best, tradition is fine UNLESS it contradicts the scripture. Catholics and Orthodox Christians tend to favor tradition over scriptures if there's a contradiction.

>>65639

Well you should understand the consequences of not believing in apostolic succesion is you're basically saying that when Jesus said "upon this rock I will build My Church" he meant that it would last as long as Peter and the Apostles lived and then nothing after that. I think anyone should be able to see that he couldn't have possibly meant that.

Apostolic succession might not be said explicitly in the Bible but the sacrament of ordination and the hierarchy of the Church most certainly is. You had to(and still have to) be ordained by a Bishop. If you were baptized you still needed a Bishop to be Chrismated. If you had to be a Bishop to ordain someone, and the one who made you a Bishop was an Apostle, then that is by definition Apostolic Succession.

Orthodox liturgy is undoubtedly richer, Catholic thought is undoubtedlysuperior

>>65836
the Catholic church is better with the matter today, but still I prefer the idea of an ever-evolving scripture rather than a single book locked in time like the Muslims see the Quran.

the Church has its tradition of Saints and other theologians expanding on the ideas set in the scripture to cover areas of life never addressed within the bible, as well as offering us alternate views on how to live a "Christly" life.

>>65871
the Church seems to ignore its own rich history and though often today however.

A vaguely related questions:
Does knowledge of western History require knowledge of Christianity?

>>65778

Well as a laymen, personally, first I would like to see each Church's Saints be canonized by the other's. That will go a long way. I would like to see Rome start using the original Nicene Creed again. The other differences, such as Immaculate Conception, and other things that we don't quite agree on aren't really that important to the laity IMO. To me reunification means we have all the same Saints and we can go to Mass or Divine Liturgy and receive the Eucharist from either one.

>>65939
Yes

If any of you want to read on the differences of the Orthodox church from the Catholic one you should read John Romanides who outlines the differences from an Orthodox perspective.

Long story short the basic argument is that the Catholic Church went astray by playing too much emphasis on speculative philosophy and abstract philosophy by obsessing over Augustine, thus they lost the mystical and transcendent elements of Christianity.

Even as an atheist this shit is fascinating to me, because the obviously the Catholic Church placed emphasis far more on Aristotle and Plato to create a unified system of theology, while the Orthodox maintained the stoic ascetic spirit is greater than speculation.

>>65939
What a dumb question
Western history is irrevocably filled with Christian thought

>>65939

If not Christianity you should at least know how the church and it's institutions functioned in European political life.

>>65971
Both of those are required tho. Some people are drawn to mysticism, others never feel it in their whole lives.
The pre-Vatican II Church was very legalistic, true, but the focus has shifted since then.

>>66012

The "East" has always placed greater emphasis on wisdom rather than knowledge The Occident however always obsessed with knowledge, this is especially true with regards to the ancient Greek philosophers and the Schollastics. However early Christianity (that of the Church fathers) was an entirely mystical way of life and asceticism which was influenced from the Stoic's and eastern syncretic religions such as Manicheanism and Buddhism (Gymnosophists).

>>64872
>without shitflinging can we talk about paganism vs paganism?

>>65971
>obsessing over Augustine
This is true. Even protestantism is basically Augustine on steroids, Luther himself was an Augustinian monk.

>>65770
Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.
-Mathew 16:28

Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.
-Luke 9:27

But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none.
-1 Corinthians 7:29

Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do.
-1 Corinthians 7:8

What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not;
-1 Corinthians 7:29

After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.
-1 Thessalonians 4:17


Jesus thought the Messiah and the Kingdom of Heaven was coming within his lifetime. Paul thought Jesus was returning in his.

>>65736
Jesus was a Jew, Paul while not inventing Christianity, wrote about it authoritatively and had his own idea which Christian church now accept. It went from the teaching of Jesus, to the teaching about Jesus.

>>65955
Does each Orthodox church recognize the others saints?

Is Saint Tzar Nicholas II a saint in the Bulgarian church?

>>65401
Thanks brudda. Feels gud.

File: 1404587304890.png (107KB, 812x1344px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 812x1344px

>>65499

>>66345

Yeah, typically. If a canonized Orthodox Church canonizes someone as a saint then the rest usually follow. The Bulgarians probably aren't going to disagree with the Russians just because they didn't know the person. What you do see, and I think it's only natural, that different countries hold certain saints more dear than others. Take Saint Patrick, for example. He was a saint pre-schism and is still venerated by Orthodox but I don't think anyone would say he's venerated in the East as much as he is in say, Ireland.

>>64872
>apostolic succession
On the bishopric level, Catholics recognize Orthodox bishops and priests because their predecessors were validly ordained and they continue to use ordination rites.

I'm hoping for a reunion with our Orthodox brethren although I think the Russian Orthodox will cause difficulties.

>>65939
You should at least grasp some basic doctrine and structural traits.

>>66345
>Saint Tzar Nicholas II
I just can't get behind this. Especially the claim that he was "a martyr for the faith".

>>66520
>I'm hoping for a reunion
As am I, but share similar concerns. It seems the Church is very interested in this, while the orthodox church is not seriously considering.

File: caricature.gif (32KB, 810x800px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 810x800px

>>66387
Not the guy you're replying to, but most of the points the protestant is spouting are valid.

Also pic very much related.

>>66580
Bartholomew I of Constantinople seems to be really interested in the prospect.

>>66686
>sola scriptura
>idols
>evil crusades
>valid

Pick one and only one.

>>66520
>>66580
>>66722
Just wait for the new Nicene Council in 2025, anons.

>>66722
How it OK with everyone that the Secular Turkish government gets to put laws on the Greek church of Constantinople?

Shouldn't the chair be open to anyone, and have the Turkish Greek church and the Greek-Greek church form one. Or open to all Orthodox Christians.

>>66722
>idols
Bowing to statues of mortal men and kissing icons is indeed idolatry. John of Damascus tried to half assedly find a loophole in saying there were statues of cherubim on the Ark of the covenant, which is a ridiculous defense of idolatry considering God SPECIFICALLY instructed the Israelites to build the Ark and only the Ark this way. He never said people should decorate their places of worship with statues of Mary and bow to them, that practice is explicitly banned in the scriptures.

The copout imaginary distinction between latria and dulia is even worse.

>sola scriptura

1 Corinthians 4:6

Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, "Do not go beyond what is written." Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other.

>evil crusades

That's bullshit indeed, you're right about that.

>>66520
How bout the protties, is there a possibility that they'll come back?

>>66833
>How it OK with everyone that the Secular Turkish government gets to put laws on the Greek church of Constantinople

It's not okay, it's just been that way since 1453. But it won't be long now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVGTudBwR6Q

>>66866
Evangelicalism is doing quite well, but generally, no, I don't think so. Protestantism is atheism.

File: 89489543eaff61bd77491dc9676b1796.jpg (47KB, 442x600px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 442x600px

>>66520
>Saint Tzar Nicholas II

>>66899
does anyone actually believe this?

sola scriptura is the most ridiculous concepts of theology history

how can you base solely on Bible when the largest majority of Christians who lived on this earth never saw a Bible in the life (and in any case wasn't able to read at all)?
The Bible entered in our houses en masse only with 1900

>>67041
>The Bible entered in our houses en masse only with 1900
Not everyone lives in the jungles of Congo like you.

>>67080
nice meme fag, still my point is valid

File: christian readings.png (548KB, 640x1000px) Image search: [Google]

548KB, 640x1000px

>>66316
>speaking of Jesus as if he were just another man or prophet
absolutelyheretical.png

>>66387
>ignoring how many times Catholics have changed their minds to better suit the times

>>67041
Not to mention the books were chosen by men hundreds of years later to fit their theological beliefs. Some should not be read literally and most people can read Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek, and don't understand the historic context.

Its not like one book came from God and was available in every language.

>>67133
>Not to mention the books were chosen by men hundreds of years later to fit their theological beliefs
this is what gaytheists actually believe

>>>/tumblr/

>>67118
yeah that pic is shit

>>67111
No, it isn't. Even poorfag farmers living in Assfuck Nebraska used to have a Bible in their household in the 19th century.

>>67184
cool and before 19th century?

>the largest majority of Christians who lived on this earth never saw a Bible in the life (and in any case wasn't able to read at all)
refuting this is shitposting

File: jorg-haider[2].jpg (33KB, 323x470px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 323x470px

>>67184
>amerifat detected
this explains a lot of things

>>67158
wait, are you denying this?

File: m1lETT5.jpg (569KB, 962x3726px) Image search: [Google]

569KB, 962x3726px

>godfags

>>67270
>implying Councils aren't assisted by Holy Spirit
gaytheist back to reddit

>>67174
>>67133
[Citation Needed]

>>67300
>conflating God and religion

Pleb.

File: 1430395309992.jpg (600KB, 700x6826px) Image search: [Google]

600KB, 700x6826px

>>67300
>fedorists

File: 1437964727366.png (228KB, 499x698px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 499x698px

>>64872
>tfw the schism will be mended in your lifetime

Orthodox reporting in

>what claims do both of them have, theologically and historically, to being the true heirs to apostolic succession?

Catholics are preoccupied with trivial political shit, ways of how to make new converts and ways to make more money off the back of the believers.

Meanwhile Orthodoxy is still sticking to what christianity originally was suppose to do. Conserving the tradition of reaching the path to salvation with Christ.

Also in my humble opinion anything beyond orthodox churches, isn't christian and shouldn't call itself christian at all.

>>67444
nice trips my Christian brother I too hope to put our differences apart so we can reunite once again against the true threat

>>67462
quality post, congrats!

>>67041
>not realizing that this was the intent of Catholicism, in order to maintain a monopoly on the power an organized religion offered

Can't imagine why they would burn at the stake anyone who spurned the Latin Vulgate.

>>67036

I'm sure some do, but it's not an official doctrine or anything, he's not canonized as a prophet. I wouldn't be surprised if he was right, though.

>>67444
sure, you mean we will all become protestants?

>>65901
>like the Muslims see the Quran.

shhh, no one tell this anon about the hadith

>>67364
then why aren't the Bibles of the Protestants, Catholics and Orthodoxy the same?
Shouldn't they all include the same books?

This isn't /x/ don't role play

>>67367
Citation about what, retard?

Can you read Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek?
No? Ok, well then at least one person can't so no citation needed.

Or do you not know the Bible wasn't issued as a single book?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Councils_of_Carthage#Synod_of_397

>>67505
>le catholic conspiracy

>organized religion
organized christian religion always existed, it has been a Council (after a Synod) which decided, with the Holy Spirit assistence what is Bible (inspired) and what is not Bible

without le hurr durr evil Church you would not have a biblical canon, since in the Bible itself there isn't a list of inspired books (muh sola scriptura lmao)

Doesn't the donation of Constantine being a forgery show that the Roman Catholics did not have a legitimate claim on rulership so they needed to make shit up.

>>67487

Thanks, not that the opinion of a non-christian would matter anyways.

>>67562
>Shouldn't they all include the same books?
because there is only one true Church assisted by the Holy Spirit
(and anyway Orthodox and Catholic canon is very similar)

>This isn't /x/ don't role play
these are catholic/orthodox beliefs, no one forces you to be catholic/orthodox or to participate in this thread
back to tumblr

>>67669
But the Orthodox and Catholic churches don't include the same books, right?

>>67654
not that it's you that decides who is christian and who is not

>>67700
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon

>>67654
that ain't the right way of thinking senpai
Jesus wanted his word to be spread not to be left in a circlejerk

File: PAPA-22.jpg (170KB, 1014x1024px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1014x1024px

>>67478
We pray for that every mass.

>>67562
>then why aren't the Bibles of the Protestants, Catholics and Orthodoxy the same?
>Shouldn't they all include the same books?

>implying Protestants were are part of the Councils

The councils happened way before the reformation. Luther scrapped certain books from the Bible because he didn't like being refuted by scripture. I've even heard some Lutherans say they don't think the book of James should be in the bible because it hurts their sola fide theory oh so badly.

The Catholic and Orthodox bibles are basically the same as far as I know

>>67613
Did I saw organized religion was bad? No, I said it offers a considerable amount of power compared to some random schmucks meeting to talk about spiritual matters. For any religion to become more organized is natural.

That being said, the abuse of the power it offers is clearly against the scriptures, and clearly something medieval Catholicism was guilty of.

>>67562
I bet you're one of those faggots who believes the Alexandrian texts were on the up and up. Do the scriptures absolutely need to be read in the language they were originally written in? Can you find scripture to support your claim?

File: great_palace_constantinople_2904_jpg_original.jpg (1MB, 2002x1030px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2002x1030px

That sad feel when Turkey will never grant Constantinople the same city-state status Vatican has and be the united bastion of Orthodoxy worldwide

>>67727
>>67700
>>67669
>catho/ortho bibles are the same

ah the ignorance of the Catholics, the bibles are different even compared to chalcedonian greek bible, let alone the bibles of Ethiopia, copts , syriacs etc

>>67444
DO you really think so? I desperately hope so. That would be amazing.

>>67702

If you're non-orthodox you're non-christian. Simple as that.

>>67717
>Jesus wanted his word to be spread

And that's why today the new pope is the anti-christ. A wolf in sheep's clothing. This is what your "universalist" interpretation of christ led your religion to. Degeneracy. Collapse will soon follow.

>>67762
>phanarios? maybe
>entire constantinople? kek its has a population of 20 million not going to happen

and ceaseropapism was strong in byzantine empire that tradition was continued under ottoman and turkish rule. they will never let it be independent/seperate.

again this is the byzantine tradition they continue, the state controls the religion.

File: 1444468651388.png (995B, 125x125px) Image search: [Google]

995B, 125x125px

>>66316
Why did you quote the epistles at me dumbass? Further, neither of the Gospel quotes suggest Jesus is predicting the end of times in his time or in his followers. The Matthew quote addresses SIGNS of the end of times, the Luke quote addresses Christ's resurrection.

Nice "le shitpost".

>>67717
This is my biggest gripe with Orthodoxy. Yes, I do think we should respect the nation-state, but that doesn't mean reject people who are of the incorrect ethnicity. That's unchristian.

>>67741
still sola scriptura is shit

>>67781
Yo yo yo f.am I'm Orthodox, you're being like the jews in Palestine after Jesus' death, they din't want to spread Jesus' message to those who din't know about the old testment ie: Pagans because they were cunts and muh traditions, where do you think Christianity would've gotten without the spreading of the word?

>>67762
Some anon on /christian/ mentioned that the greek had the chance to get it back from the British after WW1 but they picked another city and lost both.

Fug, can't find the thread /christian/ is down. RIP

>>67797
This, desu senpai. Sorry, but I have no love for protties https://youtu.be/qOG7-PYqNvU

>>65583
On the topic of Anglicans: Wouldn't they be considered a schismatic church rather than a heretical one? I'm not sure why they are lumped in with protestants despite having doctrines more similar to those of Catholicism.

>>66520
>No Saint Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia
Missed the opportunity for another saintfu.

>>67867
they had no chance, as if world powers would have let a minor nation to control the Bosporus

britsh would never leave that place willingly.

>>67803
Constantinople is literally just a couple of square km nowadays

>>67916
>What is Vatican City

>>67916
>>67929
again not going to happen, vatican city exist because the italian state had to compromise.

>>67890
They are considered schizmatic I believe. But also, Anglican heresy has gotten out of control, which also killed it. Super liberal Christianity kills churches, and Anglicans found that out the hard way.

That said, the Roman Church allows Anglican communities to return to the fold as long as they agree to stop being heretics. It's called the Anglican Rite Ordinance or something.

>>67834
> but that doesn't mean reject people who are of the incorrect ethnicity. That's unchristian.

Mfw an american protestant tells me what's unchristian and what's not.

This new age view of christianity you have in the states needs to stop.

Christ wasn't some fucking hippie that didnt wash and preached peace all day. He was a revolutionary. He was sent on earth not to tell people "Hey guys, if you want, pls follow these rules". He clearly gave out the message that if you don't follow the right path, you go to hell for eternity.

>>67847
So sayeth the non-believer. Tell me, when the Bible explicitly says, "don't go beyond me m8," do you think God was just having a giggle?

>>67966
stop parroting shit unrelated with anything

>>67966
>Mfw an american protestant tells me what's unchristian and what's not.
Catholic

>This new age view of christianity you have in the states needs to stop.
>Matthew 28:19 - Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
It's not that difficult, desu.

>Christ wasn't some fucking hippie that didnt wash and preached peace all day. He was a revolutionary. He was sent on earth not to tell people "Hey guys, if you want, pls follow these rules". He clearly gave out the message that if you don't follow the right path, you go to hell for eternity.
I know. It's unlikely you're more socially conservative than me. I despise new age tolerance/love conflation.

>>67961
Isn't that fucked up stuff only in the U.S. though, the Episcopal Church?

>>67834
> reject people who are of the incorrect ethnicity
Outside of some far-right Russian orthodox extremists I can't see this happening desu senpai, I know the oriental orthodox and the eastern orthodox disagree over the council of chalcedon but I think a russian and an ethiopian would get along well

>>67395
>Aquinas
Post discarded.

>>68032
Orthodoxy also have and had a lot of missionary activities if you wanter later examples, bulgars and russians for one.

this meme of orthodoxy just cloistering itself and not giving a shit about conversion etc needs to stop

>>67971
see >>67041

File: 1446423780874.jpg (117KB, 672x1000px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 672x1000px

>>68032
Also, this post along with your others are Protestant tier.

>>67946
I was just referencing size. It's teeny.

File: url.gif (2MB, 380x285px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 380x285px

>>68072

if this is a catholic/orthodox thread why is it full of protestants shitposting?

>>67395
>and somehow this is related to Yahweh of Hosts and Jesus on Cross

fucker is using deistic arguments

>>68050
Anglican Church has gotten very gay too. But, yes, the episcopal "church" is by far the worst. I'm enjoying watching them crumble.

>>68055
OK, but I should let you know I was considering Orthodoxy for some time, but read a number of horror stories that lead me to Catholicism.

>>68072
wut

>>68076
I don't doubt it. And, to be clear, I'm definitely not saying the Church shouldn't respect ethno-national cultural differences (as long as they don't conflict with the faith). My problem is turning away people of the nation in which you reside because they're not of the proper ethnicity.

>>68159

Deism is right though.

>>68158
Because a large part of the site's demography are protestants. The other part is catholicism, and a very small part orthodox.

>>68159
Different aspects of the argument, m8.

>>68185
>I'm enjoying watching them crumble
I'm not, considering it was the church I was baptised into. Though hearing a story about a gay brother with AIDS during a sermon fucked me off.

>>68204
>>68220
I mean If one was discussing deism, or whether god exists or not independent of Christianity yes Aquinas' argument is valid (whether you agree or disagree with him is a different matter but at least you can use his argument)

but there is no connection to Christian god, I blame the image creator more than Aquinas though I'm sure he somehow linked his argument to Christian god, but if you look at image

>there is one god
thats about it, you need to connect it to Christian god if you want to use it in a christian and not a deism thread

because I can fake the same argument by using a picture of Plotinus or Iamblichus to show how a neo platonist pagan god exists

>>68185
>I don't doubt it. And, to be clear, I'm definitely not saying the Church shouldn't respect ethno-national cultural differences (as long as they don't conflict with the faith). My problem is turning away people of the nation in which you reside because they're not of the proper ethnicity.

It's not that it's doing that on purpose, but you won't have much to do if you attend a sermon in a greek church if you don't know greek language, or alteast of greek heritage so you can feel at least a bit related to what's going on there.

And frankly i like this loose formula of spreading the wisdom of christ to all nations and leave everyone be to it. This one common church everyone should blend into is some shit that happens in anglo countries because they have no national identity.

It's kind of odd to me that EO would shitfling at the Catholics when they sided with Rome instead of their own during Chalcedon.
Both of them are Nestorian fucking shits to me.

File: his-christian.png (1MB, 1152x1178px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1152x1178px

>>68213

>>68295
wew Pope Dioscorus of Alexandria Internet Defense Force arrived I guess..

>>68357
now /pol/ is becoming an atheist board?
/his/ will never be a christian board, it will be less christian than /pol/ as humanities always attract atheistic liberals. at best this place is /lit/ lite.

but at least majority, not all but majority has the common courtesy to not shitpost as an atheist in this thread, wouldn't happen in /pol/

>>68331
>orthodox
>absolute total bro
extra ecclesiam nulla salus, if you want to be catholic be coherent

File: pol1.jpg (134KB, 621x800px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 621x800px

>>68357
>his a christian board
cool story, this place is full of gaytheists and lutherfags

>>68406
>extra ecclesiam nulla salus,
it includes orthodoxy church too retard, if you want to be catholic at least know your dogma

>>68251
I don't like that people are leaving Christianity, but I think protestantism must be crushed before we can recover.

>>68278
>but there is no connection to Christian god
I don't disagree, I'm saying that his argument is necessary but not sufficient. So, if I were trying to convert you, I might first start with Aquinas. Then move to the reliability of the gospels. Then move to miracles, etc.

>>68281
Ok, I guess that makes sense. And, in defense of the Orthodox Church, I've read that they feel they're foreigners in the US, and must provide a church for their flock who are in this nation.

>>67834
>biggest gripe with Orthodoxy
>reject people who are of the incorrect ethnicity

This is a meme that has SOME truth to it(not in theory, but in practice). In other words, some people have gone to an Orthodox parish and been turned away because they're not Greek or Romanian or whatever. If you're ever turned away by an Orthodox priest, he's not a very good priest and he's betraying his ministry. It is not the norm by any means. My parish has Syrians, Greeks, Jordanians, Romanians, Mexicans, American Indians, white Americans of all parts of Europe, one black woman. Our priest is Anglo, our subdeacon is German, our Deacon is Syrian. My church is arguably the most diverse place you could possibly be in my large city on a Sunday morning, it's frustrating to hear this "You can't be Orthodox unless you're Russian or Greek" crap.

File: this.jpg (88KB, 340x480px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 340x480px

>>68357
>>68357
>>68357
>>68357

>>68453
[citation needed]

>>68453
no faggot it doesn't include orthodox church
feel free to prove that
... but first I suggest you to read S. Pius X catechism (169-171-172), Pius IX syllabus, Catechism of Trento Council (114) and lmao even Dogmatic Constitution "Lumen Gentium"

>>68485
>>68550
>I'm ignorant about second vatican decrees

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html

CHAPTER IIICHURCHES AND ECCLESIAL COMMUNITIES SEPARATED FROM THE ROMAN APOSTOLIC SEE

I. The Special Consideration of the Eastern Churches

>>67893
British are the cancer of Europe. If only we had listened to America at the end of the WWI.

>>68441
Nah senpai, atheism is for /pol/.

>>68584
wilsonian plans was a liberal delusion, you don't leave vital strategic and energy rich places to the locals.

nevermind the fact greeks were a minority in constantinople during 1910s and 1920s

File: 2007BM5740_michelangelo_david_plaster_cast.jpg (339KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 1000x1500px

>>68398
>now /pol/ is becoming an atheist board?
Are you asking seriously? There is still obviously a large faction of Christians there. But, imo, that board has gotten unbearably retarded, and the fedoras exceptionally obnoxious, e.g., last night we had a Catholic General. Literally, invaded by retards shitposting. It's one thing to ask questions, but if you hate Christianity that much, just ignore the damn thread.

>>68441
Jokes aside, it's substantially better than /pol/, if you're looking for Christian conversation.

File: st-severus-stephane-rene.jpg (2MB, 1457x2467px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1457x2467px

>>68380
>Champion of Orthodoxy Defense Force
ftfy

Call Emperor Marcian I don't give a fuck

>>68613
go post in octochans christian, general threads are discouraged here, and unless its about ecclesiastical church history such threads shouldn't exist

not that you can't create them, but expect shitposting and dissent if you do so, If you want to be left in peace, there is always /christian/.

saying this as a believer.

orthodox countries are to influenced by arab/turkish world, their values and life styles are more alike to middle east then the christian world

catholicism > all stupid variations

>>68466
Yes, but in practice is very important. Also, I find this particularly egregious, assuming you claim there is no salvation outside of the Orthodox faith.

>American Indians
>the most diverse place you could possibly be
wew lad

I got to an FSSP Parish. It's weirdly ethnic. Everyone is extremely Irish. I feel like a weirdo, as I'm Italian.

>>68572
>I'm a pussyassfaggot modernist

what don't you understand reading this?

27 Q. Can one be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church?
A. No, no one can be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic Roman Church, just as no one could be saved from the flood outside the Ark of Noah, which was a figure of the Church.

https://www.ewtn.com/library/CATECHSM/PIUSXCAT.HTM

>>68656
I go there. It's decent. Also, maybe you're underestimating the degree of shitposting. http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/54864110/#q54864110. What's more, fedoras are always welcome, but not to derail the thread and post obnoxious shit to the point we can't have a discussion.

Also, yea, I get where you're coming from. I'm not looking for this place to be /vatican/.

>>68719
>Parts relating to canon law may not be up to date.

>>68656
>and unless its about ecclesiastical church history such threads shouldn't exist
didn't read the sticky, my gaytheist friend?

>>68719
I think you're misunderstanding this. We have always and will always believe salvation is through the Church. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that you can't be saved and be a Protard (albeit, it's very unlikely).

>>68668
spotted the amerifat

(and I'm catholic)

>>68785
/his/ is an American board

>>68656
>unless its about ecclesiastical church history such threads shouldn't exist

>This board is dedicated to the discussion of history and the other humanities such as philosophy, religion, law, classical artwork, archeology, anthropology, ancient languages, etc.

As much as I do enjoy /christian/ myself, it's not right to lie about board rules.

>>68779
>that doesn't necessarily mean that you can't be saved and be a Protard (albeit, it's very unlikely).
pssst.. that is right if you live in the middle of the jungle and you don't know Jesus message, but if you are heretic and you rejected the message, you go to hell

File: american racial elite.jpg (262KB, 992x658px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 992x658px

>>68804

>>65401
>they separated the Son from the Trinity stating that the Holy Spirit only comes from the Father
You could not be more wrong bro

How could anyone join the modern Catholic Church? It's completely at odds with everything that came before it, Vatican 2 is an obvious contradiction, and for a Church that claims to never contradict itself and to be consistent in its teaching that is a sure sign that it is not true.

>>67867
It was essentially going to be a free city, with a decent amount of Anatolia going to the Greeks (all of the majority Greek areas), but they got greedy, and lost their war against the Turks, who ended up taking Constantinople.

A total shame, really.

>>68906
It'd be a good idea to actualy educate yourself on the subject

>>66520
>I'm hoping for a reunion with our Orthodox brethren although I think the Russian Orthodox will cause difficulties.

More like Serbian Orthodox Church, considering it was at odds with Catholic Church the longest.

>>68906
because Vatican 2 didn't touch dogmas, only pastoral, so no ones gives a fuck

>>68954
It'd be a good idea to actually educate yourself on what the Church (for 1940 years) said before V2

>>68685
>assuming you claim there is no salvation outside of the Orthodox faith

I don't claim that. And like I said, the few parishes that actually turn people away based on ethnicity are total outliers. What I think more people experience is some sort of alienation in their parish instead of actual exclusion. Even at my parish, I'm closer to the people who have been here in the US for a few generations or more than I am with the people who don't speak English that well. It can get a little cliquey but it's certainly not out of any animosity for one another. It's just natural. I mean, if you're an Anglo-Saxon American and you go to a Romanian Orthodox Church where it's almost ALL Romanians and they all speak in Romanian, I could see how that would be off putting, but that's really not the case in the Antiochian, Greek, or Russian Orthodox in the US. My archdiocese actually requires about 90% of the Divine Liturgy to be in English so if anything you're more likely to see a Syrian man who doesn't speak English come to my parish and feel a little alienated even though it's an Antiochian Orthodox Church.

>>68997
Please list he Dogmata that were changed

File: clownmass[1].gif (98KB, 436x332px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 436x332px

>>69100
oh officially no one :^)

>>68970
'Pastoral'...I still hear people say this today when they are trying to explain things like why they should be okay with abortion, or same sex marriage, or communion for the divorced, or any number of things that are against the Church's teaching. It seems to mean 'the law is too hard, go soft, play dead, maybe they will come around'.

In any case, people do not really treat V2 like a 'pastoral council' (whatever that is, it had never existed before, and stands only as another ambiguity of V.) even if it was proclaimed to be so. It is treated like any other council (until it is convenient).

>>69100
http://www.catholictreasures.com/articles/25errors.html

The worst thing about V2 is its ambiguity. I have seen people use convoluted sophistry to make V2 work with previous teachings, but you shouldn't have to. The problematic aspects of the council are often prima facie heretical, and only after the fact can be explained with a 'yes, but, what it means is...'. Consider the famous proclamation that the Christians worship the same god as the muslims. Really? Did a Vatican document just deny the trinity? Yes, it really did. 'Ah, but, of course, what it really meant was....' The council was a war between modernists and traditionalists, it is known, Kasper himself confirmed it. This is why the council is so ambiguous, they had to tread the line between heresy and tradition constantly, so the heresy was softened into an ambiguous mess that has led to over 50 years of confusion, heresy and chaos.

>>69307
>In any case, people do not really treat V2 like a 'pastoral council'
I know, that's the problem, pray for them

I'm a pretty non-denominational christian with some spiritual elements.
I go to a methodist church, but I like some catholic aesthetics- overall I think that christianity has become a way too divided religion, all these sects and shit. As long as you respect your fellow christian brothers- I think you are fine with whatever sect you think is best.

>>69445
>I'm a pretty non-denominational christian
non sense, repent

>As long as you respect your fellow
there is only one truth, there is only one faith (and one path)

>>65401

>they separated the Son from the Trinity stating that the Holy Spirit only comes from the Father

Where do you get your information from? Ridiculous. The issue with the filioque came when the Latin's added it in and many in the East and West took it to mean that it implied a double procession of the Holy Spirit, once from the Father and again from the Son, thereby breaking the Trinity. The Trinity is One. There can only be a single procession. The Latin addition of the filioque breaks this understanding, and so it was rejected.

>Byzantine ruler placed himself as head of the church

No, this was never done. Perhaps you're thinking of the Patriarch of Constantinople? But he never placed himself as the head of the Church, either. There was a case made (and to be made) that the Pope in Rome overstepped his bounds as first among equals. But rejecting Papal primacy is not the same as declaring that you then have that primacy.

>Apostolic succession
Both East and West have legitimate Apostolic succession, and valid sacraments, recognized by both sides.

>how it works today
Essentially, the Orthodox church is as it was a thousand years ago where as the Latins have drifted. Vatican II, and every single Ecumenical Council after the first seven.

File: img_pod_mexico-catholic-church-pod-1802-RTR3DXUB[1].jpg (345KB, 926x617px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 926x617px

>modernists will defend this

>>66845
Don't you see how stupid it is to base sola scriptura on a passage that comes from the scripture that didn't exist at that time?

>>66845
He doesn't seem to mind Mary especially since she continues to act as his messenger to this day. Apparitions are a constant both in orthodox and Catholic church.

>>65776
Charlanmage died how many centuries before the schism again?

>>69704
240 years

>>65776
>greek orthodox
>catholic
>greek
>catholic

that's an oxymoron

>>70104
spotted the amerifat who doesn't even know the general meaning of "catholic"

>>68613
> last night we had a Catholic General. Literally, invaded by retards shitposting.
Same goes for islam thread invaded by christians, or atheists thread. If you want a discussion maybe you should go to /pol/

File: Group 2.png (612KB, 538x606px) Image search: [Google]

612KB, 538x606px

>>66316
I think this is what we call "misunderstanding scripture."
>thisIsWhyProtestantismIsHarmful.jpg

>>67118
The irony of that post.

You literally pick and choose what you want to follow.

>>68834
lol. This isn't true, and you know it.
>>68872
tru senpai
>>68906
>Vatican 2
The "abuses" of Vatican 2 are grossly overstated. With that said, I'm disgusted by the modernism of Contemporary Catholicism.

>>71626
>Le Bible shouldn't be taken seriously meme

>>69037
>What I think more people experience is some sort of alienation in their parish instead of actual exclusion.
I could see this, as people seem to have similar gripes about Catholicism. As America is still majority protestant, this wouldn't really be surprising. I think a lot of protestants, especially those of the evangelical variety, think Church should be a rock concert, or a night out with friends. What they miss is Catholicism is not a euphoria pill, it's a difficult spiritual journey.

>>69445
>way too divided religion
>says the new age spiritualist
Come on, bruv.

>>70566
>Same goes for islam thread invaded by christians, or atheists thread.
>They also ruin other threads
>Therefore, we should keep having religious threads there, instead of the BOARD DEDICATED TO RELIGION
Fuck off.

>>71797
Huh? Prot are Fed?

>>71753
>This isn't true
actually it is
> and you know it.
pathetic

>>70566
Seriously look at this post. This is a board for religion discussion and these fucking atheists are persistently shitting everything up. They're even going so far as to contradict information in the sticky to justify their belligerent shitposting.

The sooner atheist trolling is banned the better.

I really like listening to russian orthodox music

>>71947
Point me to doctrine that would prove it. Also, if God is to accept he ignorance of the savage, why not the Protestant?

>Martin Luther
>Some dude born into a baptist church

>>71970
It's ok. The Gates of Hell Shall Not Prevail Against God's Board.

>>71984
what exactly do I have to prove you? that for catholic religion you need to be catholic to be saved (not that it guarantees salvation automatically)?

Both of them have Apostolic Succession, in that sense they are both "true heirs" of it. However, the Orthodox Church is the legitimate continuation of the Church Christ founded, whereas the Catholic Church is more like a non-heretical Coptic Church.

>>71984
are you even catholic? if protestants are saved why do we have baptism? confession? if you can be saved anyway....

>>72035
>>72118
I think you're misunderstanding my point. You're saying that Protestants are unquestionably excluded from salvation. I'm saying this goes against Church teaching. They can still be saved, and it will still be via the Catholic Church.

>>72157
and how would they save themselves?

>>72035
That's not the case, at least since Vatican II.

>>72255
salvation doctrine can't be changed by a Council, it can't be changed at all

I must go to sleep now but I'll post this
it's from the current catechism (so modernists can't accuse me to be hurr durr le backward)

---------------------------------------

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?

Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation

848 Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.

I think you can understand why I made the example of the savage (who doesn't know the message) and he heretic (protestant who refuses the message)

goodnight to everyone

>>71626
>picking and choosing what to follow
>being Catholic

pick both

>>72465
My salvation is not contingent on any earthly power.

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

By grace, anon. I don't know why you willingly kuck yourself to some old fart in Italy, but don't claim that one's Church has any sort of say in the my afterlife.

>>65939
Yeah. Religions and mythologies are a necessity to understand ancient people and their societies. It's pretty interesting too, and that's coming from someone with a muslim background.

>>72806
>Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained
John 20:23

>>72806
not him (I'm Orthodox) but it's easy to be a non-denominational now in 2015 that everyone has a Bible at home

I agree with this>>67041
plus it has been the Church (Orthodox and Catholic) which decided what books belong to the Bible and what not

>>72927
So what you're saying is you have no idea what you're talking about

>>67867
Nope, there were at least more than one discussed treaty that would considerably reduce the ottoman lands (I think in many of them constantinople was supposed to be an international zone). However, the turks ended up just beating the people who occupied their lands (Brits, French in syria, Greeks and Armenians) and got their current borders. I think it was at that time that they finally made a request to other countries stop calling Istanbul whatever they did (tsargrad)

File: k3lhe.jpg (36KB, 490x345px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 490x345px

>>65401
>Byzantium Ruler placed himself at the head of the church in the East
No he didn't
>while the Pope remained head of the church in the Western Roman Empire
More like APPOINTED himself
>Filioque Clause
Catholics added that, by ignoring how the Father serves as the wellspring of the Trinity you heretic
>Idols
Ecumenical councils
>The churches were completely separate by 1054.
We still considered Catholics part of us, if only in error. When they introduced infallible papacy, then we saw them as completely separate.
>We have synods. We were always like a Republic in some fashion. You're giving the Emperor to much credit.

>>65480
Patriarchs are equal to the Catholic Pope. The "Patriarch of Rome" was just the first among equals.

>>65836
>the ecumenical councils didn't "invent" the Bible, they merely put a canon stamp on already established scriptures.
You kind of contracted yourself. The Holy Tradition allowed the councils to determine what Gospel and Epistle wasn't a Gnostic heresy. The Bible Cannon was not dictated at all during the first century.
>The problem with oral tradition is that since there are no written accounts of it, the church can literally make shit up and pass it as tradition dating to apostolic times. Which is exactly what happened with priest celibate, indulgences, purgatory etc.
It would help when Protestants didn't CUT OUT BOOKS IN THEIR BIBLE.

>>65939
Wester civ is defined by Christianity.

>>66520
>I'm hoping for a reunion with our Orthodox brethren although I think the Russian Orthodox will cause difficulties.
Obligatory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoU2o1iRN0U

File: Pope_Francis_laughing_outside_of_St_Peters_Basilica_during_the_general_audience_on_April_1_2015_Credit_Bohumil_Petrik_CNA_4_1_15.jpg (39KB, 680x453px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 680x453px

>>66686
>666
Don't listen to this guy.
>sola scripture
Please give me Biblical citations and evidence to prove your extra-biblical doctrine
>idols
Do you even know the difference between Idols and Icons?
>evil crusades
go to /pol/ and if you're too lazy... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y

>>66845
>Idolatry
Please refer to Second Council of Nicaea
>sola scripture
2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

1 Corinthians 11:2
I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you.

>>72296
God can do whatever he wants.

>>68331
>Judaism
>Not synagogue of satan tier
Their theology and practices are the anathema of Christianity. Sure it has heresy, but it's more outright blasphemy.

>>73933
sure, but not the Church

>>69578
WTF is this blasphemy?

File: 1802130c32af94bmed+%281%29[1].jpg (51KB, 600x401px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x401px

>>74065
a reminder that second vatican council absolutely didn't change anything :^)

>>73515
>APPOINTED himself
PETER
E
T
E
R

>>74874
Peter didn't have anywhere near the power the Pope does. He had the power to bind and lose, but that was given all the Apostles by Christ. Giving the Pope the powers that the Church of Rome does violates the Second Canon of the Second Ecumenical Council, which was ratified by the Pope.

Being the leader of the Church doesn't give him power to do things reserved for ecumenical councils.