Orthodox church of St. Elizabeth in NJ

[helenazar]

We believe absolutely that ours is the True Faith passed down to us unaltered from the Apostles..

But this is what everyone seems to believe about their own faith.  

[Georgiy]

We believe absolutely that ours is the True Faith passed down to us unaltered from the Apostles..  
 
 
 
But this is what everyone seems to believe about their own faith.

But if we look specifically at Christianity, we are faced with the fact that there are three different Churches which can be traced back to the beginning of Christianity - Othodoxy, Catholicism, and the Monophysite Churuches (Syrian, Coptic etc). The Monophysites fell away from the other Christians in the 500s, the Catholics from the Orthodox in 1054. If we read through the theology and history, it seems clear enough (to me at any rate  ) that the Orthodox Church is the one which has kept the Faith as handed down to it without change.  

[helenazar]

 ... it seems clear enough (to me at any rate  ) that the Orthodox Church is the one which has kept the Faith as handed down to it without change.  

I''m sure you're right as you know a lot more about this than I do. I do remember reading that early Christianity itself (when it was techically just a branch of Judaism) was strongly revised by Saul/Paul, while the rest of the apostles were totally against what he came up with, so it just depends which apostle you want to go by, I guess  .  

[Dashkova]

I''m sure you're right as you know a lot more about this than I do. I do remember reading that early Christianity itself (when it was techically just a branch of Judaism) was strongly revised by Saul/Paul, while the rest of the apostles were totally against what he came up with, so it just depends which apostle you want to go by, I guess  .  

Yes, Paul of Tarsus, as far as most any scholar is concerned, brought into being the *religion* of Christianity, and when it came time to select writings for the Christian canon, well, most of it wound up being written by Paul, and it was he who spread the new faith in the near east cities of the Roman Empire, and even unto Rome.
The apostles, well, Peter, James, and their gang, were of course suspicious and jealous of Paul's success and they clearly didn't consider him a true "apostle."

Anyway, I do agree that as far as Christianity goes, the Orthodox (some would say the Armenian Orthodox, particularly) has stayed truest to the "official," earliest organized faith.

Personally, I prefer the books that were left out of the canon, as I suspect they come closer to the truth of many matters, and Constantine, after all, was really only interested in the propaganda uses of the curious new faith that had attracted so many.

[bluetoria]

 
But if we look specifically at Christianity, we are faced with the fact that there are three different Churches which can be traced back to the beginning of Christianity - Othodoxy, Catholicism, and the Monophysite Churuches (Syrian, Coptic etc). The Monophysites fell away from the other Christians in the 500s, the Catholics from the Orthodox in 1054. If we read through the theology and history, it seems clear enough (to me at any rate  ) that the Orthodox Church is the one which has kept the Faith as handed down to it without change.  

I studied theology at university - little good did it do me! - I could NEVER understand the reason for the division between the East & West - it always seemed to me to be playing with words rather than any REAL truth. It all boiled down to filioque (& the Son) as far as I could follow! It also seemed very far removed from the Gospels.  In no way am I disagreeing with what you write Georgiy - I am only trying desperately to discover what separates Catholicism & Orthodoxy now.

[Georgiy]

Dunno...i do recall that when St Paul went to Jerusalem he only saw Peter and James, but it sounds like modern speculation as the oldest Church histories don't seem to talk about it (from memory - but then they wouldn't anyway I guess). But the striking thing about the early Church is that no matter how geographically seperate from each other  they were, they all professed the exact same faith as each other and maintained the same traditions. They were One Apostolic Church.

We need a thread to talk about the Orthodox Church I guess. Actually an understanding orthopraxia and the Orthodox Faith can help a lot in understanding the Imperial Family.

[bluetoria]

Will you start one? I should like very much to learn.

[Georgiy]

The filioque was a biggie, but also the movement by the Pope to have himself seen as the head of the entire Church played a big part. i'm not sure why they added the filioque as it is scripturally unsound. No doubt there are plenty of extremely scholarly books out there which explain everything! (Though in a way that is so dry, long and complicated it's difficult to get through). The Fatheralexander website has lots of good info about Orthodoxy, like I say, and I am sure you will find clear information on that site, including about the differences between the two Churches.

[Georgiy]

Will you start one? I should like very much to learn.

Not that I could teach anyone anything worth knowing!
I'll have to think about it - I really wouldn't want to do it without a blessing from our Priest.

(And here I have been for weeks talking about the Church with no blessing...)

[bluetoria]

I have followed the fatheralexander site (THANKYOU!) To be honest it isn't the theology that concerns me (most Catholics understand little of it anyway) it is the spirituality which draws me...but perhaps I should leave it there for now.

[Georgiy]

The Orthodox Church is deeply spiritual - I agree - that was the first thing that drew me to her, the absolute truthfulness of the spirituality I felt there - it touched me to the depth of my soul instantly.

[bluetoria]

D'accord!  

[helenazar]

Yes, Paul of Tarsus, as far as most any scholar is concerned, brought into being the *religion* of Christianity, and when it came time to select writings for the Christian canon, well, most of it wound up being written by Paul, and it was he who spread the new faith in the near east cities of the Roman Empire, and even unto Rome.
The apostles, well, Peter, James, and their gang, were of course suspicious and jealous of Paul's success ...

Well, Paul never even met Jesus, while Peter and James knew him well, so can you blame them for assuming that they were more "qualified" to judge and interpret? The story I learned about this went something like this (I hope I get it right): in order to get more recruits for the new Christian sect, Paul decided to "ease" the requirements by first starting to accept gentiles, which wasn't done before. In order to attract even more new recruits, Paul cancelled the dietary laws and the circumcision laws ( from what I understand that one was a big deterrent! ) among some other original rules, and generally tried to taylor the new rules so that they appealed to the general public more. After he adjusted these things, a lot more people started to flock to him. The other apostles, like Peter and James, were none too happy with this - they felt that Paul is only adjusting things in order to be popular/get more people in, so this is why they renounced him. So according to this view, although orthodoxy may be the oldest out of the three sects, it is by no means the original, since even Jesus himself did not seem to follow the current version (his was pre-Paul)...  

I am not by any means an expert on any religion, I just happen to remember this story I once read.  I hope this doesn't offend anyone as it is meant purely for discussion purposes. But for me, finding out things like this makes me wonder about the authenticity of any religiouos sect...

Yes, seems that  we could use a section on religion here!  

[bluetoria]

Yes, the major argument between Peter & Paul - which only goes to show that things haven't changed much in 2000 years!

Will YOU start the new thread then please?

[helenazar]

 

Will YOU start the new thread then please?

Done