Thought this might be handy general for this board, given the amount of discussion of Catholic and Orthodox topics.
Everybody have fun, and please keep all autism and shitposting to an appropriate minimum.
I'd be especially interested to hear more about Hesychasm from any Orthodoxbros, it's a pretty fascinating practice that seems not to have made it to Catholicism at all.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
christianitybeliefs.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
blogs.ancientfaith.com
oca.org
youtube.com
twitter.com
> given the amount of discussion of Catholic and Orthodox topics.
Such as? No one cares about this shit other then you.
Just trying to get some friendly discussion going, no need to get all aspergers about it :)
This thread will die soon because christians here just want to argue with non-believers and preach to anyone who doesn't want it.
Considering this is made for Christians, it's the non-believers who come in just to argue. In a thread opposed to Christianity your statement is more apt.
Who /latinmass/ here?
Used to go regularly last year.
Way different experience, makes you realise that the church really shit the bed by getting rid of it in Vatican II. It's a bit rigid and formal, but the atmosphere is so much better.
One problem I've found is that it tends to be conducted in churches where they're super-autistic about HOW the ritual should be performed, but pay little enough attention to the actual meat of Chrisitanity (i.e. christian teaching, prayer etc). It tends to be a bit 'by the book' with no real feeling or something, hard to describe.
Still, nice to see it making some kind of recovery.
>Threads should be about specific topics, and the creation of "general" threads is discouraged.
>we wuz basileis and shieet
hhehehe
>converting Germanic folk to Christianity
>literally HAVE to make Him a badass warrior
Always a chuckle
Arianism always fascinated me, because as I read the Bible and other Christian theology it seemed that Jesus was not equal to the Father.
I know it's heresy but it ring so true for me
>why are you worshipping this wimp on a stick lmao
>sh-shut the fuck up he was a warrior for the faith
>ok lol
Torah is childish, the stories are noble in essence but childish and the writing is annoying.
The wisdom literature is very interesting - especially the translations from LXX, as the translator also assumed the role of editor, and filtered shit out.
If anyone did not read anything in the bible yet I suggest to go with: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Job, and Sirach.
That's about it - rest is reducible entirely.
New testament - with exception of intellectual additions and impeccable writing of Luke - in the gospel and acts is pretty shitty written, even more childish than the bronze age myths of Torah and very very delusional.
Just let go of this infantile thinking.. embrace science - it's the new and prosperous human endeavor.
It isn't heretical when God does make Christ, and Christ says in the Bible to focus on God being good, rather than people calling Yeshua good. Saints, Gurus, Monks, etc, it is hard to distinguish them and God, because they are so closely yoked with the Father. In the Trinity Christ is equal to God, and upon further research, it adds up that Christ is a direct manifestation of God, and therefore is.
If you were to convert someone to Eastern Orthodoxy, what would you say? What is the valid points for someone to trot off from Rome to Constantinople? UH-. asking for a friend.. (This is as a serious question as it is not, so no "go to the desert and think about it" or "kek traitor" just like.. go on about it)
en.wikipedia.org
"The ladder is referred to as immovable due to an understanding that no cleric of the six ecumenical Christian orders may move, rearrange, or alter any property without the consent of the other five orders.[1]
Upon the pontifical orders of Pope Paul VI in 1964, the ladder was to remain in place until such a time when the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church reach a state of ecumenism. "
"In 1981, just a month after the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II, an attempt to remove the ladder from its location was made, but was quickly prevented by local Israeli police though the culprit was not caught. In 1997, the ladder was removed and remained missing for weeks."
What the fuck was his problem?
That Mary looks pretty sexy.
>posts a modern drawing
DIS IS HOW DE GRISTGUCKS GONVERDED DE BAGANS :DDD
I would ask them to think about if they want Pope Francis as the leader of their church.
I mean one bad pope shouldn't scare away catholics in theory, right? Alot of catholics I personaly know does not see him as a legit vicar of Christ. Do you have any other like theological like.. way to approach it?
Ask them where they stand on the filioque?
>The church should be about what I want.
Sounds like protestant is the church for you.
>The church should be about what some guy in a dress in Rome wants
wew
Oriental Orthodox here. Am I Invited, or this only for Chalcedonians?
Tell me more. There's a Syrian Orthodox Church near my friends house, I'm thinking of attending.
Orthodoxy is actually apostolic.
"Paul the apostle said
If one come to preach to you
Other doctrine than we knew
Be he man or angel bright
Curs'd be he in church's sight
Doctrines all diverse arise
Shooting up with many lies
Blest is he who first and last
Trust God's truth and holds it fast"
Got Orthodox in there, there you go pal.
What do you want to know? I go to a Syriac Orthodox church (Malankara/Indian). You won't be able to take communion or blessing if you aren't oriental yourself. The Antiochan/Syrians are a bit more guest-friendly than the Indian churches but both allow guests.
Are you byzantine orthodox?
I am very dumb so could you like breakdown what he meant?
No, Catholic. But when I travel out there, there's no church I can get to.
I'm also interested in attending because I don't think the Schism will ever be healed by ecumenical conferences attended by bishops. They'll be healed when we start acting as brothers in Christ. So I want to start somewhere.
Recieving communion is no problem since neither me nor my friend can receive communion. What do you mean by 'blessing' though?
K, here's one from the 9th century
>Heresy & Heresy general
You worship Satan.
Eat shit.
The quote is a paraphrase, but basically the logic is
- How do we know that our interpretations/practices are correct?
- We can't on our own (this is the fallacy of hubris that the protestants make)
- Assuming a tradition which disallows deviance from tradition, as Paul encourages, we can! If our traditions are the same as our forefathers etc. until an Apostle, we can actually justify them.
So this is why we value 'apostolic descent', because we understand that its the only way to justify a belief. That to us, is the core of orthodoxy. Allowing re-interpretations and deviance, one can never be sure what is truth.
> the Schism
Well for us, that is unimportant as we split of at Chalcedon.
>Blessing
In aramaic it is called 'Hoosoyo' and is a traditional prayer/blessing for the forgiveness of sins, performed before qurbana (communion). Its one of the most important parts of the Syriac (east or west) liturgy, which is called 'qurbanaqadisha'
christianitybeliefs.org
What a wicked false religion
You seem to know what you're on about. You from a orthodox country yourself? And tell me more, what differs Orthodoxy from Catholicism? How come it didn't spread as much as catholicism? And shit like that, fun facts and what not.
So then members of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church are welcome?
>They'll be healed when we start acting as brothers in Christ
Nomatter how brotherly we act (and we should strive to act this way regardless of the state of our church politics imho), there are irreconcilable differences in theology and philosophy. At least for our church, joining with catholics would be antithetical to our principles, and I think the same issues are there between catholics and orthodox, right? (I might be wrong)
Not to offend, but why do you think that theological differences can be mended without serious theological discussions of scholars?
> You from a orthodox country yourself?
I'm from India. My church, the Malankara Orthodox Church, was founded by Apostle Thomas; we're one of the apostolic oriental churches, in union with the Armenian, Coptic, Syrian and Ethiopian ones.
>Orthodoxy from Catholicism
The term 'orthodoxy' is confusing, because it includes both Chalcedonian (Eastern Orthodox: Greek and Slavic) and Non-Chalcedonian (my church and the other oriental ones). We get along fine with the eastern orthodox churches, as its a very small theological difference between us. But orthodox and catholic are completely different in theology, philosophy, and practice.
Also, we practice the Syriac rite, meaning we use aramaic as the liturgical language.
The Eastern Orthodox Split away at Chalcedon, and the Catholics split off from them, at the schism. So for us, we only recognize armenians, copts, syrians and ethiopians as true christians.
>was founded by Apostle Thomas
Thomas never went to India
Yes, he did, the church of the east, and all oriental orthodox churches talk about this. Why do you think otherwise?
en.wikipedia.org
That's not biblical
Its not. Its historical, and recorded in many church records, including 'acts of thomas'. Why would it be in the bible?. Do you only believe things which are in the bible, and reject all other sources of information?
>Nomatter how brotherly we act (and we should strive to act this way regardless of the state of our church politics imho), there are irreconcilable differences in theology and philosophy. At least for our church, joining with catholics would be antithetical to our principles, and I think the same issues are there between catholics and orthodox, right?
>Not to offend, but why do you think that theological differences can be mended without serious theological discussions of scholars?
I don't think these issues are unimportant, and I do think the time for working together will come. But I think practically, and spiritually, waiting on the Church Elders is expecting the tail to wag the dog.
Both of our churches has healed schisms and heresies in the past, but that was because we spoke as a common communion (though one divided on issues).
Another reason ecumenicalism appeals to me as a personal cause is because I believe apostolism entails a duty, not just a doctrine to believe in: I believe we are, whether we accept it or not, part of one church, Christ's church.
>'acts of thomas'.
Apocryphal
>aiting on the Church Elders is expecting the tail to wag the dog.
I agree. But we can't make decisions on anything without them. I think the duty of the common man is to show to the priests that resolving the schisms is important, so they actually take the effort to do it.
> apostolism entails a duty
a duty to do what?
>I believe we are, whether we accept it or not, part of one church, Christ's church.
Even those with heretical ideas? To me, those people are part of another, divergent church which either needs to fix its wrong ideas or be considered another religion.
>Apocryphal
So you are saying, that the many records in separate churches which attest to a reasonably coherant record of his travels, are ALL apocryphal?
I would understand if the bible directly said something against this, but the bible never says he didn't go to the east.
Maybe you don't trust your church historians and elders due to your western idividualist hubris, but we do, and the fact that not just our church but many, say this happened, and our church can literally trace itself back to this time, is enough evidence for us. If you want to reject this go ahead, the arrogance of westerners is known to us already, and your opinions are as worthless as those of heretics or infidels.
Also let me point out, that plenty of western scholars have agreed that while the details of Thomas' travels are inconsistent (the miracles he performed in persia, etc.), the places he visited and the general timeline is pretty sound. Read any of the references in wikipedia for sources.
Literally straight outta Psalms:
>You will tread on the lion and the cobra; you will trample the great lion and the serpent.
- Psalm 91:13
Funny, I didn't read the passage where Jesus wore chainmail and wielded a spear.
Jesus was marketed as a warrior to Germanic tribes. He was not an earthly warrior.
I feel this is relavent since we're talkin warriors
You posted a page from the Stuttgart PSALTER ya dingus.
en.wikipedia.org
>9th-century depiction of Christ as a heroic warrior (Stuttgart Psalter, fol. 23)
Christ is a heroic warrior; He is the Lion of Judah.
The psalm says "trample upon the lion and serpent" and the image depicts exactly that.
Does it also upset you that people didn't literally walk on top of lions?
Holy hell why on earth you are so covertly bitter and insulting to one another? If you are an atheist/protestant/muslim I would understand given the fact you are an outsider but it is really astounding to see curses-swearwords etc being hurled into one another.
Do all of you come from extremely strict households? You put a coin in the swear jar whenever you say "god damn"? It is as if you come here to blow off steam, acting in a manner that you cannot act in real life.
You must be new
This is autism.
Germanic tribes depicted Christ as far more warlike than He truly was, seeing him in armor and not the desert enrobed messiah He actually was.
They took a single warlikeish passage and expanded it into warrior-king depictions.
Not a single branch of Christianity thinks this way that isn't from northern Europe. Face it, your religion is corrupted by pagans who only converted for convenience.
Here's another depiction of Jesus armed with a spear and radiating halo.
These are all over Northern Europe, no wonder the Picts started thinking of him as a sun-god as soon as the missionary left.
>pagans who only converted for convenience.
and now the western euros are leaving and I say good riddance to bad rubbish, not the guy from above either
Post Hymns! Here's a classic Aramaic one from the Sacred Liturgy of Addai and Mari (used in the church of the east, and any east syrian rite church):
youtube.com
What are some interesting hymns from your church? Do you sing the same ones each week?
How about Iconography?
Christ is both the Lion and the Lamb.
The Gospel that was preached the Germanic tribesmen is the same Gospel that is preached to day. Furthermore, the Germanics equated Christ with Baldr who was not warlike at all. I imagine you assume that only a warrior deity could have been accepted by Northmen because your knowledge of history is based off Skyrim.
>and now the western euros are leaving
???
Interesting Fact: Our Church (Indian Orthodox) was originally tied to the now-extinct Church of the East (in Persia), and we had decided early on to not promote iconography.
After the Church of the East died out, we were left without allies, so we asked the Syriac church if we could communion with them in around 800 AD. We slowly adopted their ideas however, and these included iconogrphy.
Christ came as the Lamb, He will return as the Lion. Slight difference.
And nice try, but in not some sort of neo-pagan you want me to be, I simply remarked it was funny how that was how Christ was depicted among many Germanic ethnic groups.
I'm a practicing Christian who has much to walk in my faith still, but it's simple historical fact I was posting.
Iirc it was not uncommon at one point to have Mjolnir amulets with crosses in them, with Thunor's "lover of humanity" equated with Christ's sacrifice (or the other way around I guess).
I learned something interesting, this pleases me
All Christians believe Jesus is the Lion of Judah.
Revelation 5:5
Why do you presume to understand the motivations of people who converted over a millennia ago?
Northerners weren't the only ones to depict Jesus with a radiating halo m8.
There is nothing unorthodox about depicting Christ as a heroic warrior.
Agreed. While Catholicism itself is not that different from us in theory, the average westerner just has a really skewed idea of what Christianity is. These neo-pagans and protestants revisionists have contributed nothing positive in my opinion.
>Why do you presume to understand the motivations of people who converted over a millennia ago?
They were either too uneducated to understand what they were converting to, or purposefully skewing the intended meaning of verses to fit their paganist ideas. In either case, trash-tier 'christians'.
>These neo-pagans and protestants revisionists have contributed nothing positive in my opinion.
Thanks, nice to see someone who recognizes what damage the west has done to Christianity
More Hymns in Aramaic:
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
These 3 are all from different rites, but all in the same language (aramaic), and are shared amongst all the oriental orthodox churches (though armenians use old armenian for example, instead of aramaic).
Christ's first disciples were uneducated fishermen whereas the academic scribes and teachers of the law were his fiercest adversaries.
The "intended meaning" of the Gospel is that Christ is the Son of God who suffered death on the cross to save humanity from our sins. The same message was preached then as it is now.
Habibai, we orthodox all understand it in our hearts. The westerners meant well in converting, but they did not take the religion to heart in mass I feel.
Not only that, but their treatment of Eastern and Oriental Orthodox peoples during the crusades - they simply don't consider us as brethren. That sort of attitude has caused all sorts of damage through history.
A related fact:
My church was almost forgotten due to persecution by the Portugese. They deemed us heretics due to non-chalcedonianism, burnt our libraries (containing books from the apostolic age) and only once we took a stance and refused to convert to Catholicism:
en.wikipedia.org
did we start to recover what was lost. similar things happened to the coptic and armenian churches...
By the way, what church are you from?
>I think the duty of the common man is to show to the priests that resolving the schisms is important, so they actually take the effort to do it.
But that's exactly what I propose we do. It is easy for priests to think it is unimportant when we stay isolated and wait on their superiors to take the lead. When we come together and act as a common community, held back by these disagreements, the priests will know it is important, and when the priests know it is important, the bishops will know it is important.
But if we wait on the bishops, even if the DID solve every theological issue of note, it wouldn't change a thing. Because we would still be fractured. This is one of the reasons I prefer the latin mass. When the Catholic mass was in Latin, Hispanic, Phillipino, Korean, and European Catholics all prayed together. But now, we have separate masses all Sunday in our different languages.
>a duty to do what?
Pick up the task given to us by Christ and his apostles.
>Even those with heretical ideas? To me, those people are part of another, divergent church
And I don't think a divergent church is actually possible. There are parts of the church in error, but Christ created one church for us. This is something the early Christians never doubted, even when faced with Heresies: there is One Christian Church, and we are tasked with carrying it out.
A perverse person stirs up conflict, and a gossip separates close friends.
- Proverbs 16:28
I hold them accountable for preventing Tsar Ferdinand of Bulgaria from reclaiming Constantinople and dealing Islam and the Ottomans a crushing blow, it would have likely saved the Armenians from what happened, of which they did nothing to stop and punished in the most half assed way.
Eastern Orthodox, Started Bulgarian parish, then Antioch, now Greek with many Romanians
>Not putting Islam in barbarian tier
That's some heresy right there
How much is your view of protestants circumstantial?
I myself am a protestant, but try to take a "back to the early church" view of things as a non-denominational Christian.
I truthfully can't stomach Anglican Christianity, it's roots are in worldly affairs, but I also can't help but feel the Catholic church took an unhealthy obsession with Rome, what with its sermons in Latin and such.
What do most Orthodox/Catholic breadpilled anons here feel of the sincere protestants?
your heart is in the right place but obviously we believe ourselves right
What if we both believe Jesus is right?
I'll be entirely honest, my vision of a "sincere protestant" wears a Balaklava. That's on me, but that's really the first thing I think about that I have to push aside.
who is this semon demon (n-no homo)
Indeed. But are you pointing a finger with that statement?
- Westerners were the ones to persecute based on mono/miyaphysite etc.
- Westerners sack Constantinople, persecute orientals, etc.
- Through history, westerners treat themselves with exceptionalism. What better way to stir up conflict?
- Meanwhile the only conflict the oriental churches has ever taken part in, is that of eliminating the nestorians.
You hypocrite, you people deserve exactly what is happening to your faith, for you sowed the seeds of it yourself.
Yeah, and armenians that I know are still bitter about this.
Nice. My current church is in America, and had its iconography done by a Bulgarian iconographer in the area. I sincerly hope we can reconcile with the eastern orthodox desu, but until then lets just hope that our faiths and cultures remain as strong as they always have (Mena olam vada melovolam ol meen a meen).
>wears a Balaklava
is that a UVF reference?
Father Momcilo Dujic, Priest and Chetnik military commander
pic is Father George "Ammunition" Smith of the battle of Rourkes Drift
Yep.
Are you talking to me or people who have left this earth a long time ago?
Irishman?
Orange Men
If you want to go back to the early church, then you would agree with the logic here: . Otherwise you are just making things up regarding how the early church worked - the only way to know for sure is apostolic descent.
>What do most Orthodox/Catholic breadpilled anons here feel of the sincere protestants?
Basically this . You are heretics, but its not your fault really. Why not convert to a western rite of orthodoxy if you like the early church stuff?
Here's a great podcast series if you are interested, about the theology of orthodoxy, and the early church:
blogs.ancientfaith.com
And check this out:
oca.org
Does a sincere Catholic do the same?
Same user here, but I've actually been very interested in Orthodox Christianity, but unfortunately Orthodoxy has little presence here in Dixieland.
I see. Yeah we are in agreement then.
The issue of language is artificial to me though. The oriental churches all have a close relationship, but we each speak totally different lanauges. We are united by theology and common history.
>And I don't think a divergent church is actually possible.
Christ created one church, but not all of us are part of it. Some christians have deviated so much that they may as well be a different religion, like muslims. We should respect them, but not call them one of us.
The actions of your faith have meaning. If you denounce those who did those as heretics or wrongdoers then perhaps we would be fine, but as it stands, you seem to be okay with the way things happened, implying you share their worldview.
Isn't Acts an accurate depiction of how the early church worked?
Also doesn't the Holy Spirit counsel us in all things?
There has been a revival of western orthodoxy and I linked a few resources. I know a few protestant priests who went and studied in orthodox seminary, and are now running western orthodox churches. One of them preached at our church as a guest speaker last pesaha (easter time).
I encourage you to do the research, learn about the theology yourself, and if you agree with it, maybe try to find a church to go to. If you can't, then you can be content in your own personal faith.
Even granting a moral equivalency, the sincere Catholics usually stay away from the IRA, since they're Marxists. Even the Sincere Catholics that do join up have to do some mental gymnastics, the way Sincere Catholics in the American Democratic party have to do some mental gymnastics on Abortion.
The sincere Protestants don't have that kind of problem with the UVF.
This is basically my image of a 'sincere protestant'.
I denounce any behavior that is not Christlike, my own included.
If you follow Jesus you are my brother regardless of what church you attend.
And rightfully so.
It is accurate, but not detailed in any way, and incomplete in terms of theology and practice - maybe not for the common man, but the details of the theology are pretty unclear from it. The holy spirit does counsel us, but there is still room for interpretation. Just look at how many diverse faiths arise in protestantism, when the freedom to interpret based on the bible is given. But in orthodoxy, there is only one path for the most part. This again, is due to the way we justify truth, and something that must have been true for our predecessors.
Jesus is the only path.