FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Information on the Schism of the Orthodox Church.
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
This hopefully won't start a feud that ends up in the theology section but "Orthodox" are anything but when it comes to the doctrine/dogma of hell. We have a Greek, Antiochian, OCA (orthodox church in America), ROCOR (russian orthodox church outside of russia) and a serbian orthodox church near/around us. We (my husband and I) attended a couple years back those churches....ALL OF THEM except the priest at the Serbian Orthodox Church (which by the way is Fr. Seraphim Rose's jurisdiction-he was with ROCOR at the beginning) anyway they ALL believe hell is in the presence of God and his "love" is what burns a person. They do not believe in eternal seperation, darkness, fire, worms, torment-(unless it's God's "love") or an actual place/dimension where souls go. Everyone is in God's presence, everyone only those that love God feel Heaven as joy and his love as torment to those that hate him. We talked to priests from EVERY church of the ones I listed and even went onto to their websites to find out HOW one can believe in such complete and utter heresy. They like to quote St. Isaac the Syrian and a fellow named Alexander Kalimiros (I might have misspelled the last name) anyway he writes (the Alexander guy) a homily he gave back in 1980's and it is now gospel "orthodox" truth....

Read it if you dare...and get a bucket ready because if you are traditional or heck even a modernist you'll  :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:  Yes it's that bad. You see if you hear an Eastern "orthodox" person say "oh that's western"-that's there way of insulting you. (we went there for 1 year and it took that long for us to find out what they believed even though their psalm readings/Saint readings/church father readings totally conflict with their theology. We found out through the head priest at the church we went to when he handed us in the Catechism class Kalimiros' work....Then we called every single "orthodox" church around and lo and behold they all agreed. Only the Serbian guy didn't but he also told us when we asked him if he'd commune a pro-abort that "it's complicated and you are only catechumens anyway so what does it matter"-he didn't recognize my baptism (from a baptist preacher) and my husband's from an Episcopalian minster when he was a baby.) The OCA, ROCOR, and Serbs are all the same when it comes to baptism even though Pope Stephen answered that question back when he had an issue with St. Cyprian. Antiochians and Greeks will confirm and will recognize the baptism. And yet we are to believe that these people that hold very contradicting views are "the Church"?? Yeah right, not since they left Rome, now they are A church in schism from THE CHURCH.

I digress I'm sorry here's the link...I urge anyone that wants to know what "orthodox" believe to read this. (only the "super correct" another "orthodox" term believe in hell from what I understand but they believe that their tiny churches are THE CHURCH too)  :eyeroll:

http://www.orthodoxpress.org/parish/river_of_fire.htm

There was a really good refutation of it by a guy named Vladimir Moss.

http://www.orthodoxchristianbooks.com/ar...revisited/

Fr. Seraphim Rose died before Kalomiros gave the talk/paper out but if he were alive at the time I'm sure he would have ripped him to shreds like Moss does...


It boggles my mind that some people think that the "Orthodox" are just in schism....no they are in heresy as well. Don't get me started on their view of the atonement it's very intertwined with "River of Fire"..........(if God is only ever loving then Christ didn't die to appease his wrath but only to restore man's perfection)-HERESY  :O
When I say "orthodox" I say that in reference to those that deny the reality of hell and the atonement.  :((

Fr. Seraphim Rose was Orthodox...he wasn't perfect though since he denied the Papacy in favor of "greatest among equals" and not the Filioque.  :P
(08-31-2012, 05:58 PM)traditionalmom Wrote: [ -> ]This hopefully won't start a feud that ends up in the theology section but "Orthodox" are anything but when it comes to the doctrine/dogma of hell. We have a Greek, Antiochian, OCA (orthodox church in America), ROCOR (russian orthodox church outside of russia) and a serbian orthodox church near/around us. We (my husband and I) attended a couple years back those churches....ALL OF THEM except the priest at the Serbian Orthodox Church (which by the way is Fr. Seraphim Rose's jurisdiction-he was with ROCOR at the beginning) anyway they ALL believe hell is in the presence of God and his "love" is what burns a person. They do not believe in eternal seperation, darkness, fire, worms, torment-(unless it's God's "love") or an actual place/dimension where souls go. Everyone is in God's presence, everyone only those that love God feel Heaven as joy and his love as torment to those that hate him. We talked to priests from EVERY church of the ones I listed and even went onto to their websites to find out HOW one can believe in such complete and utter heresy. They like to quote St. Isaac the Syrian and a fellow named Alexander Kalimiros (I might have misspelled the last name) anyway he writes (the Alexander guy) a homily he gave back in 1980's and it is now gospel "orthodox" truth....

I don't quite understand why you believe this understanding of hell to be heretical. The basic idea is that all men will be before God because that is our telos, but that those who choose to reject God will suffer while those who open themselves to God will experience it as heaven. Whether or not it's correct, I think there are certainly good reasons for thinking of hell in this way, so I'm not sure why you think it is completely out of bounds.

Also, I'm not sure that the standard Orthodox understanding of the Atonement is really all that problematic. In fact, I think it is quite easy to reconcile it with the Catholic theory as developed by St. Anselm.
(08-31-2012, 06:44 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-31-2012, 05:58 PM)traditionalmom Wrote: [ -> ]This hopefully won't start a feud that ends up in the theology section but "Orthodox" are anything but when it comes to the doctrine/dogma of hell. We have a Greek, Antiochian, OCA (orthodox church in America), ROCOR (russian orthodox church outside of russia) and a serbian orthodox church near/around us. We (my husband and I) attended a couple years back those churches....ALL OF THEM except the priest at the Serbian Orthodox Church (which by the way is Fr. Seraphim Rose's jurisdiction-he was with ROCOR at the beginning) anyway they ALL believe hell is in the presence of God and his "love" is what burns a person. They do not believe in eternal seperation, darkness, fire, worms, torment-(unless it's God's "love") or an actual place/dimension where souls go. Everyone is in God's presence, everyone only those that love God feel Heaven as joy and his love as torment to those that hate him. We talked to priests from EVERY church of the ones I listed and even went onto to their websites to find out HOW one can believe in such complete and utter heresy. They like to quote St. Isaac the Syrian and a fellow named Alexander Kalimiros (I might have misspelled the last name) anyway he writes (the Alexander guy) a homily he gave back in 1980's and it is now gospel "orthodox" truth....

I don't quite understand why you believe this understanding of hell to be heretical. The basic idea is that all men will be before God because that is our telos, but that those who choose to reject God will suffer while those who open themselves to God will experience it as heaven. Whether or not it's correct, I think there are certainly good reasons for thinking of hell in this way, so I'm not sure why you think it is completely out of bounds.

Also, I'm not sure that the standard Orthodox understanding of the Atonement is really all that problematic. In fact, I think it is quite easy to reconcile it with the Catholic theory as developed by St. Anselm.

I restart this in on the theological board calling it "orthodox" view of hell...see ya there.
(08-31-2012, 07:02 PM)traditionalmom Wrote: [ -> ]I restart this in on the theological board calling it "orthodox" view of hell...see ya there.

. . . in hell?  :LOL:
(08-31-2012, 04:57 PM)Old Salt Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-31-2012, 04:51 PM)richness of tradition Wrote: [ -> ]Do the Orthodox have Confession like in the Catholic Church?
From my understanding they have the scarament, but it is administered a lot differently than the Latin Rite [west] Church.

The only difference is superficial.  It's not done in a box, and it's not done in Latin.
(08-31-2012, 05:14 PM)ImpyTerwilliger Wrote: [ -> ]That's one difference between Byzantine Catholics and Orthodox.  They're not the same.  The Byzantine Catholics are more infected with Modernism, thanks to their contacts with Latin clergy.

Oh snap!
The schism is quite a complex subject. It's not as cut and dry as some would like to believe.  I  would say read everything you can from both the Catholic and the Orthodox sides. A good read on the Orthodox view of the question of Peter's authority is called The Primacy of Peter which is a collection of essays compiled by the late Father John Meyendorf. You can find it on Amazon for pretty cheap.
(08-31-2012, 04:33 PM)Old Salt Wrote: [ -> ]Thank you, but I am actually looking for a factual piece on why the Orthodox went into schim and rejected the Authority of Peter, so I guess a Western truthful piece.

The Catholic Encyclopedia is a decent overview: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13535a.htm

But dividing matters into "factual Western truthful" and what I suppose would be "mythical Eastern lies" is not an accurate approach to the matter.  The Catholic Church is right, but anyone who follows in the footsteps of +Lefebvre ought to be sympathetic to the state of the Orthodox.
(09-01-2012, 02:38 AM)Parmandur Wrote: [ -> ]The Catholic Church is right, but anyone who follows in the footsteps of +Lefebvre ought to be sympathetic to the state of the Orthodox.

I guess this is your new tune. Trads who are irregular are like the Orthodox.
Pages: 1 2 3