CathInfo.com

Excerpt From "Christian Order"

http://www.christianorder.com/features/features_2007/features_apr07.html

April 2007

Eastern Orthodoxy Unveiled
   
JAMES LARSON

We tend to think of Eastern Orthodoxy as a branch of Christianity whose form of worship and religious symbolism may seem rather strange to us, and we are also ready to admit that the one really important Catholic doctrine which they have rejected is the Primacy of the Pope (we tend to mistakenly think of their rejection of the Filioque - the doctrine that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son - as being a rather marginal issue), but most of us are not prepared to consider that Orthodoxy is something radically different, and even opposed, to Catholicism.

However, such is the case. The extraordinary fact is that virtually any serious Orthodox writer will be the first to make precisely this claim: namely, that Orthodoxy and Eastern Spirituality represent a faith and spirituality which in many ways are in profound opposition to the Latin Tradition. And this, despite the fact that his counterpart in the West is usually expending a good deal of effort in attempting to prove that the differences are minimal and inconsequential.
Dionysisus and the "Palamite" tradition
I want to begin our analysis of Eastern Orthodox theology and spirituality with a series of quotes which I hope will shock the reader into a state of acute watchfulness. It is, of course, always possible to distort a writer’s thought by taking quotations out of context. We will therefore be discussing their full meaning in relationship to Eastern theology and spirituality as we proceed in our discussion. For the present, however, I would like the reader to try to conceive of any context in which the following statements might be acceptable. They are all taken from authors writing in what certainly must be considered the dominant Orthodox tradition.
Two of the writers are of ancient tradition. Dionysisus the Areopagite was considered until relatively recent times to be of apostolic origins. In his writings he disingenuously portrays himself as a contemporary of the apostles, and to have witnessed the solar eclipse at the Crucifixion. It is now known for certain that he lived somewhere around the year 500 A.D. We should also note that the writings of Dionysisus are of immense importance to Orthodox tradition, and have also probably been the primary source of Neoplatonic contamination of Western theology.

Gregory of Palamas (1296-1359) is considered by the Eastern Church to be a Saint (proclaimed to be so by a Synod in Constantinople in 1368), and the greatest theologian in the Eastern Orthodox tradition. A series of Eastern Councils in the 14th century endorsed his theology as being the doctrinal basis for Orthodox Christianity.

The two other writers, Vladimir Lossky and John Meyendorff, are probably considered the most respected explicators and apologists for this tradition (the "Palamite" tradition) in the twentieth century. I would therefore ask the reader to carefully consider all the following quotes:

1. "The cult of the humanity of Christ, is foreign to Eastern tradition….The way of the imitation of Christ is never practiced in the spiritual life of the Eastern Church." (Vladimir Lossky, Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, 243

2. "The Eastern tradition knows nothing of ‘pure nature’ to which grace is added as a supernatural gift. For it, there is no natural or ‘normal’ state, since grace is implied in the act of creation itself." (Lossky, 101)

3. "The notion of a state of grace of which the members of the Church can be deprived, as well as the distinction between venial and mortal sins, are foreign to Eastern tradition." (Lossky, 180)

4."The notion of merit is foreign to Eastern tradition." (Losski, 197)

5."The essence of God is everywhere, for, as it is said, ‘the Spirit fills all things’, according to essence. Deification is likewise everywhere, ineffably present in the essence and inseparable from it, as its natural power. But just as one cannot see fire, if there is no matter to receive it, nor any sense organ capable of perceiving its luminous energy, in the same way one cannot contemplate deification if there is no matter to receive the divine manifestation. But if with every veil removed it lays hold of appropriate matter, that is of any purified rational nature, freed from the veil of manifold evil, then it becomes itself visible as a spiritual light, or rather it transforms these creatures into spiritual light." (Gregory Palamas, The Triads, p. 89)

I apologize for responding here so late, and for coming back after being rude to many people here, but I figure sharing my experience with Orthodoxy could help some people and make a good discussion.

I left Catholicism for Orthodoxy towards the beginning of 2020. I was certain it was the truth thanks to apologetics from Jay Dyer and people like him. I went through my catechumenate and became active on Orthodox social media, but over time, I started to discover more and more cracks in the foundation. There were the True Orthodox, who claimed they could not be in communion with the rest of the synods due to heresy. There were some synods within the True Orthodox that claimed the other True Orthodox synods were in heresy, and so made their own bodies. There were universalists, who claimed that it was certain everyone would be saved, and that Orthodoxy had taught this (or at least not condemned it as heresy). There were the Oriental Orthodox, who claimed that only the first three ecuмenical councils were legitimate, and so made their own churches. Then, there were certain people- one of whom was particularly nasty and prideful- who practically made their own doctrine. Jay Dyer is one of those people, but he isn't the one I'm referring to here. Simply put, he's not very important- many people in Orthodox call him a heretic, and he calls them heretics. So it goes.

It was talking to one person, a so-called "True Orthodox" inquirer, that made me realize that Orthodoxy is based on pride; it is a religion of private judgment no different than the Protestants, but simply with canons, Patristics, and your own personal reasoning. This person was clearly wrong on a bevy of issues and wouldn't even talk to his priest about it. He would have massive debates with people online, trying to prove himself right over everyone else, and never let anyone else have the last word. When given a Patristic quote that blatantly contradicted him, he would conform it to what he already believed rather than change his mind to fit the Fathers. I asked him, "Millions of people believe they have the truth and are wrong. You aren't special; in fact, you've certainly been wrong on things before. What makes you think that you're right now?" His response was that he could figure he was right by his own reasoning. When I asked how he knew that reasoning was right, he said he used further reasoning. I told him it was certainly possible for him to be wrong, and that it was a stretch to say that he was definitively right in any of his reasoning. After all, we all make mistakes, and when it comes to our views on things in the world (be it financial statements, a trial, or religious opinions), it's always possible that there is some information we haven't considered, some other factor that we aren't considering, or we're just flat out wrong. Yet, he said there was no possibility about this, because he had reasoned about this. He really believe there was no epistemic possibility for doubt of him being wrong. This is the same thing that everyone in Orthodoxy believes: that their reasoning is infallible, that they understand everything about what the Fathers said, and that everyone who disagrees is wrong- most of the time, so wrong that their beliefs warrant damnation.

This is the basis of Eastern Orthodoxy, and all Orthodox faiths: your own private judgmejnt and pride. It's the same reason why people like Richard Ibranyi exist. It's because of this that I'm trying to reconnect with my Catholic friends again, and attend an Eastern Catholic church that uses the Byzantine rite. The Papacy and Papal infallibility are the only ways to solve this issue; otherwise, we are forever left with religious skepticism... we cannot know for sure that we are reasoning correctly on religious matters if we just use our own intelligence. Orthodox people deny they do this, yet this is the sole basis for their beliefs. We have to actually have faith.

Please forgive me, all of you, and be cautious with the Eastern Orthodox. Please pray for me, too, that I may return to Catholicism and stay this time.