Roman Catholic verses Orthodox Church - which is correct?

[polonius]

This question has arisen elsewhere and I'd be interested in readers views of this issue.

The (Western) Roman Catholic Church claims apostolic succession through the Apostle Peter. It claims infallibility (no errors) by way of ecumenical (general) councils and all ex cathedra papal teachings.

The (Eastern) Orthodox churches claim apostolic succession through one of the other Apostles and only the infallibility of their first 10 ecumenical councils and no infallibility of their reigning senior bishop.

Since the Eastern Churchs claims apostolic succession, their sacraments are considered valid by the Roman Catholic church, but Catholics are advised to seek out one of their own clergy and only use the Orthodox clergy when it is not possible to use Catholic clergy.

Interestingly, some of the Eastern Church have reunited with Rome in which case they are known as Eastern Rite Catholics. In doing so thy have had to agree to accept certain teaching not regarded as valid in the Orthodox Chuch such as the "stain theory" of original sin and the Immaculate Conception of Mary.

Question: Am I in error here or are there other major differences in beliefs?

[Betho_BR]

Then had the churches rest throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied. (Acts 9:31 KJV)

The phrase "churches rest throughout all" in Greek is "ἐκκλησία καθ᾽ ὅλης" (Ekklesia Katha Holos), this prayer καθ᾽ ὅλης is better understood when we consult its occurrences in Latin: "per universam" throughout the world (Lk. 4:14; 23:5; Acts 9:42; Acts 10:37), in this case, the Jewish world.

This was the Catholic assembly for circumcision, under the jurisdiction of the Apostle Peter.

But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; (Gal. 2:7 KJV)

The Council of Jerusalem represented a significant milestone in the history of the early Church, establishing a hierarchical unity among the Catholic assemblies, both those of circumcision and uncircumcision. It is worth noting that the assembly in Rome had already proclaimed the faith in Jesus throughout the known world, as recorded in Romans 1:8, demonstrating its preeminence over all the churches in Judea. This enhanced unity, reinforced by the council's decision, strengthened cohesion among Christian communities, consolidating a common foundation under a single authority.


Question: Am I in error here or are there other major differences in beliefs? polonius

I also include among the differences the Filioque Controversy and the concept of Purgatory. Additionally, there is a slightly less significant issue, which pertains to the veneration of statues (Teraphim) of domestic saints.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Betho_BR in post #2]

Neither are correct. They both have very similar doctrines, such as hell-fire, the Trinity, the separate life of the soul (as it supposedly comes out of the body after death), one top guy, like the Pope (whereas Jesus is our only Leader), tradition takes precedence over the Bible, and more.

[Betho_BR]

[Replying to Betho_BR in post #2]

Neither are correct. They both have very similar doctrines, such as hell-fire, the Trinity, the separate life of the soul (as it supposedly comes out of the body after death), one top guy, like the Pope (whereas Jesus is our only Leader), tradition takes precedence over the Bible, and more.

The doctrine of the Trinity is often considered a Greek philosophical development from the doctrine of Unity, the latter explicitly grounded in Scripture, while the Trinitarian understanding has its roots in theological interpretations that evolved beyond the explicit biblical texts of the Unity doctrine. Similarly, just as Peter is the foundation of the Jewish Catholic Assembly, later of the Roman one. As for the topic of hell-fire, we can explore this approach in detail later.

[Betho_BR]

The Council of Jerusalem represented a significant milestone in the history of the early Church, establishing hierarchical unity among Catholic assemblies, both circumcised and uncircumcised. It is worth noting that the assembly in Rome had already proclaimed faith in Jesus throughout the known world, as recorded in Romans 1:8, demonstrating its preeminence over all churches in Judea. This unity, reinforced by the Council's decision, strengthened cohesion among Christian communities, consolidating a common foundation under a single authority.

After the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman Empire around 70 AD, Catholic communities in Judea faced an even more adverse fate. Accused by Jews of high treason, circumcised Christians were blamed for following Jesus' instructions, who, foreseeing the imminent catastrophe, advised in Luke 21:20-22:

"When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains! Let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. For these are the days of vengeance, when everything that is written will be fulfilled."

This historical scenario highlights the complexity and tensions among communities in Judea after the crucial events that led to the destruction of Jerusalem.

This motivated the Apostle Peter's escape to Rome, among other factors, including the growing pressure on the Christian community in Jerusalem before its destruction. Additionally, the significant influence of the Jewish community in Rome exacerbated the challenges faced by Christians, as Roman laws not only regulated civil matters but also interfered with religious practices and beliefs.

The transition from the circumcised Catholic assembly to the assembly in Rome marked a period of significant Jewish influence on religious practices. Elements such as the concept of purgatory, the introduction of household saints' figurines (teraphim), the presentation of infants in the temple, priestly vestments, and the adoption of the culture of the Jewish forefathers underscored this fusion of traditions. These practices, among others, enriched the spiritual aesthetics of the community and contributed to the formation of a unique religious identity.

In this context, it is important not to confuse the Hebrew word FESEL (sculpture image) of other gods with the word TERAFYM (household saints' figurines) from Hosea 3:4, for example. A TERAFYM was used to save Jesus' lineage, as described in the account of Michal and David, contributing to the preservation of David's lineage, which plays a significant role in the genealogy of Jesus Christ, as recorded in the New Testament Gospels (1 Samuel 19:13-23).

Regarding the veneration of the Virgin Mary, it is related to the episode of the visit of the Magi:

"And going into the house, they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh." Matthew 2:11

In depicting this scene, it is crucial to recognize that the worship is exclusively directed towards Jesus. However, considering the context of the phrase "the child with Mary his mother," we realize that, while Jesus is the primary object of worship, there is a simultaneous veneration directed towards Mary. This highlights the unique dynamic between mother and son, where devotion to Jesus is undeniably central, but Mary is also honored concurrently, adding a deeper and contemplative dimension to the scene.

All these scenes are depicted in engravings in the early Christian catacombs in Rome.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Betho_BR in post #5]
There is no scripture anywhere that indicates we are to venerate Mary. Jesus always said that the Father is to be glorified, and the Father alone. He prayed for the Father to GIVE him some glory along with Him, but he had to ask for it. Anyway, Jesus always turned attention to the Father, so that He may be glorified.

"Father, the hour has come. Give glory to your Son, so that your Son may glorify you, just as you gave him authority over all people, so that he may give eternal life to all you gave him. Now this is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. I glorified you on earth by accomplishing the work that you gave me to do. Now glorify me, Father, with you, with the glory that I had with you before the world began." (John 17:1-5, New American Bible)

Mary is never mentioned to receive glory, nowhere in the Bible. The Father, YHWH, is basically ignored by both Catholics and Orthodox. Yet He is the one that Jesus said to worship and glorify.

[Betho_BR]

[Replying to Betho_BR in post #5]
There is no scripture anywhere that indicates we are to venerate Mary. Jesus always said that the Father is to be glorified, and the Father alone. He prayed for the Father to GIVE him some glory along with Him, but he had to ask for it. Anyway, Jesus always turned attention to the Father, so that He may be glorified.

"Father, the hour has come. Give glory to your Son, so that your Son may glorify you, just as you gave him authority over all people, so that he may give eternal life to all you gave him. Now this is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. I glorified you on earth by accomplishing the work that you gave me to do. Now glorify me, Father, with you, with the glory that I had with you before the world began." (John 17:1-5, New American Bible)

Mary is never mentioned to receive glory, nowhere in the Bible. The Father, YHWH, is basically ignored by both Catholics and Orthodox. Yet He is the one that Jesus said to worship and glorify.

And Abigail saw David, and hurriedly went down from the donkey, and fell before David on her face and bowed to the ground. 1 Samuel 25:23

He has brought down rulers from their thrones, And has exalted those who were humble. Luke 1:52 NAU

Maria became the queen mother, and the reverence bestowed upon her by the magi for being the mother of the King of the Jews was no different than the homage paid by Abigail to King David.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Betho_BR in post #5]
There is no scripture anywhere that indicates we are to venerate Mary. Jesus always said that the Father is to be glorified, and the Father alone. He prayed for the Father to GIVE him some glory along with Him, but he had to ask for it. Anyway, Jesus always turned attention to the Father, so that He may be glorified.

"Father, the hour has come. Give glory to your Son, so that your Son may glorify you, just as you gave him authority over all people, so that he may give eternal life to all you gave him. Now this is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. I glorified you on earth by accomplishing the work that you gave me to do. Now glorify me, Father, with you, with the glory that I had with you before the world began." (John 17:1-5, New American Bible)

Mary is never mentioned to receive glory, nowhere in the Bible. The Father, YHWH, is basically ignored by both Catholics and Orthodox. Yet He is the one that Jesus said to worship and glorify.

And Abigail saw David, and hurriedly went down from the donkey, and fell before David on her face and bowed to the ground. 1 Samuel 25:23

He has brought down rulers from their thrones, And has exalted those who were humble. Luke 1:52 NAU

Maria became the queen mother, and the reverence bestowed upon her by the magi for being the mother of the King of the Jews was no different than the homage paid by Abigail to King David.

Well, then, is King David venerated and prayed to? Is he called the King of heaven?

[Betho_BR]

Well, then, is King David venerated and prayed to? Is he called the King of heaven?

King David was not created in the past; that is, in ancient eras by prophecy. He was not full of grace, meaning justified and immaculate, and he was not created superior to the angels.

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

[onewithhim]

Well, then, is King David venerated and prayed to? Is he called the King of heaven?

King David was not created in the past; that is, in ancient eras by prophecy. He was not full of grace, meaning justified and immaculate, and he was not created superior to the angels.

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

I don't know what you mean by David not being created in the past. And he must've been full of grace, because YHWH chose him to be King of Israel, in the line of the Messiah. He was not "immaculate," and neither was Mary. She was born in Adamic sin just like all of us. Mary was not created superior to angels. That was how Jesus came to be, if you'll remember. He was made "a little lower than the angels" to become a man on Earth (Hebrews 2:7-9), but after proving his loyalty to God, he was higher than everybody (except of course God). Mary wouldn't have been created higher than the angels if even Jesus was not given that position forever before he proved faithful. "Jesus humbled himself and became obedient as far as death....For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend...and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God, the Father." (Phil.2:8-11)

Where in the Scripture does it say that we must bend our knee to Mary? Where does it say that she is "immaculate"? And you said yourself that Mary's homage is no different than King David's of Israel. Then you seemed to take that back.