the similiarity and difference between Orthodoxy and catholic

[walter1234]

Is there any written works of  Church father mentioning the purgatory?

Many early Fathers speak of a purging or cleansing after death, though there were/are different opinions as to how this takes place.

And where. I don't recall the idea of material created purgatorial fire being an ancient one. And the whole money-making apparatus tied to purgatory was late Medieval.

The First indulgences were actually granted by the Pope at the request of St Francis of Assisi (and it was for making a pilgrimage to a church).  Indulgences were then granted for visiting the Holy Land, certain prayers etc.


However, it is interesting to note that the "selling" of indulgences was practiced in the East as well except they were called "Absolution certificates"  here is some info on them from an orthodox website
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Absolution_Certificates

Is that Orthodox Church also falled/corrupted, sold absolution certificates for money and taught  that sin can be absolved by these certificates in 16 -18century?

[Cyrillic]

Is that Orthodox Church also falled/corrupted, sold absolution certificates for money and taught  that sin can be absoluted by these certificates in 16 -18century?

...

sigh

[walter1234]

Is that Orthodox Church also falled/corrupted, sold absolution certificates for money and taught  that sin can be absoluted by these certificates in 16 -18century?

...

sigh

Orthodox Church teaches infallible Church ....

INFALLIBLE ?

[Cyrillic]

Is that Orthodox Church also falled/corrupted, sold absolution certificates for money and taught  that sin can be absoluted by these certificates in 16 -18century?

...

sigh

Orthodox Church teaches infallible Church ....

INFALLIBLE ?

Even if indulgences were/are wrong that doesn't change the fact that it has nothing to do with the infallibility of the Church. You don't discern between faith and praxis. If the Orthodox Church called a crusade and killed a puppy those things wouldn't have disprove her claim to infallibilty at all.

[Justin Kissel]

Infallibility? What's it good for? Absolutely nothin'! Uh-huh!

[walter1234]

Is that Orthodox Church also falled/corrupted, sold absolution certificates for money and taught  that sin can be absoluted by these certificates in 16 -18century?

...

sigh

Orthodox Church teaches infallible Church ....

INFALLIBLE ?

Even if indulgences were/are wrong (something I do not say) it doesn't change the fact that it has nothing to do with the infallibility of the Church. You don't discern between faith and praxis. If the Orthodox Church would have called a crusade or killed a puppy wouldn't have disproven her claim to infallibilty at all.

Sin can be absolved by indulgence...
This faith is absolutely wrong...

[mike]

You don't discern between faith and praxis.

Praxis also should be ortho. And in this case teachings were also incorrect. The Church however later corrected Her mistake.

[Cyrillic]

Need I remind y'all the Decian persecutions and the indulgences granted by the martyrs?

"That they who have received a certificate from the martyrs, and can be assisted by their help with the Lord in respect of their sins, if they begin to be oppressed with any sickness or risk; when they have made confession, and have received the imposition of hands on them by you in acknowledgment of their penitence, should be remitted to the Lord with the peace promised to them by the martyrs.(St. Cyprian of Carthage, epistle 13)"

A libellus - as those certificates were then called - and an indulgence is pretty much the same. Even Patriarch Dositheos of Jerusalem said that indulgences were an ancient and venerable tradition. I'm not sure whether selling it is a pretty good idea, though,

[domNoah]

To the general topic here are some things that deserve mention

1) Ecclesiastical Divorce
2) Birth Control
3) Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation
4) Our views on Mystical Visions and Apparitions

[Cyrillic]

1) Ecclesiastical Divorce
2) Birth Control
3) Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation
4) Our views on Mystical Visions and Apparitions

1 has been done in the Churches of the East since long before the schism.

3 is a local Latin lower-t tradition.

What about 4, though? Those apparitions are optional to believe even for Latin Catholics, right?

[theistgal]

Sin can be absolved by indulgence...
This faith is absolutely wrong...

Walter, I'm not Orthodox but their faith is NOT "absolutely wrong"!!! It is most definitely the oldest and most reliably "right" of Christendom!

I can't help wondering if you're just looking for reasons to reject them (as well as my own less reliable but still venerable church)?

Don't throw away all your respect for the Faith based on a few mistakes some individual Christians in the past may have made!

[walter1234]

Need I remind y'all the Decian persecutions and the indulgences granted by the martyrs?

"That they who have received a certificate from the martyrs, and can be assisted by their help with the Lord in respect of their sins, if they begin to be oppressed with any sickness or risk; when they have made confession, and have received the imposition of hands on them by you in acknowledgment of their penitence, should be remitted to the Lord with the peace promised to them by the martyrs.(St. Cyprian of Carthage, epistle 13)"

A libellus - as those certificates were then called - and an indulgence is pretty much the same. Even Patriarch Dositheos of Jerusalem said that indulgences were an ancient and venerable tradition. I'm not sure whether selling it is a pretty good idea, though,

Do you mean that indulgences was orginally used to honor the martyrs and remind us to made confession, but it later turn as a commodities of Church?

[Cyrillic]

Need I remind y'all the Decian persecutions and the indulgences granted by the martyrs?

"That they who have received a certificate from the martyrs, and can be assisted by their help with the Lord in respect of their sins, if they begin to be oppressed with any sickness or risk; when they have made confession, and have received the imposition of hands on them by you in acknowledgment of their penitence, should be remitted to the Lord with the peace promised to them by the martyrs.(St. Cyprian of Carthage, epistle 13)"

A libellus - as those certificates were then called - and an indulgence is pretty much the same. Even Patriarch Dositheos of Jerusalem said that indulgences were an ancient and venerable tradition. I'm not sure whether selling it is a pretty good idea, though,

Do you mean that indulgences was orginally used to honor the martyrs and remind us to made confession, but it later turn as a commodities of Church?

Yes, something like that. Before the martyrs died they sometimes gave a libellus - or indulgence - to the surviving faithful. Sometimes even to people who had lapsed in the persecution. With a libellus their penance was remitted (indulgences do not forgive sins but remit penances) and they were accepted back to communion. The martyrs didn't sell those libelli, AFAIK.

[domNoah]

1) Ecclesiastical Divorce
2) Birth Control
3) Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation
4) Our views on Mystical Visions and Apparitions

1 has been done in the Churches of the East since long before the schism.

3 is a local Latin lower-t tradition.

What about 4, though? Those apparitions are optional to believe even for Latin Catholics, right?

I would like to see your sources for 1, I am aware of the churches in the east allowing separation but not remarriage.  In fact the current discipline on divorce observed in the East is rather current (more than just adultery is considered).

3.  We do not view Sundays and Holy Days as being little t tradition.  In the west we attribute it to the Apostolic Constitutions and coming from the Apostles.

4.  I was referring to our approaches and how they differ, it was my understanding that the East view revelations as being a more private matter that should not be shared, in the west we often do keep the mystical revelations private till after the death of the individual but then if they do not contain error they can be promulgated.

[walter1234]

Need I remind y'all the Decian persecutions and the indulgences granted by the martyrs?

"That they who have received a certificate from the martyrs, and can be assisted by their help with the Lord in respect of their sins, if they begin to be oppressed with any sickness or risk; when they have made confession, and have received the imposition of hands on them by you in acknowledgment of their penitence, should be remitted to the Lord with the peace promised to them by the martyrs.(St. Cyprian of Carthage, epistle 13)"

A libellus - as those certificates were then called - and an indulgence is pretty much the same. Even Patriarch Dositheos of Jerusalem said that indulgences were an ancient and venerable tradition. I'm not sure whether selling it is a pretty good idea, though,

Do you mean that indulgences was orginally used to honor the martyrs and remind us to made confession, but it later turn as a commodities of Church?

Yes, something like that. Before the martyrs died they sometimes gave a libellus - or indulgence - to the surviving faithful. Sometimes even to people who had lapsed in the persecution. With a libellus their penance was remitted (indulgences do not forgive sins but remit penances) and they were accepted back to communion. The martyrs didn't sell those libelli, AFAIK.

As what I know , The Pope/ Catholic Church can run countries and always have fightings in the Crusades War in medieval. The Catholic Church should always have the financial problem. Is it that Catholic Church turned the indulgence as a commodity in order to resolve its financial problem?

And did Orthodox Church turn absolution Certificate as a commodity, like Catholic Church?

[Cyrillic]

And did Orthodox Church turn absolution Certificate as a commodity, like Catholic Church?

No, but some bishops did.

[walter1234]

And did Orthodox Church turn absolution Certificate as a commodity, like Catholic Church?

No, but some bishops did.

I see, Just some bishops, not the church as a whole did.

[Cyrillic]

And did Orthodox Church turn absolution Certificate as a commodity, like Catholic Church?

No, but some bishops did.

I see, Just some bishops, not the church as a whole did.

No, it didn't happen in Russia, for example.

[domNoah]

Need I remind y'all the Decian persecutions and the indulgences granted by the martyrs?

"That they who have received a certificate from the martyrs, and can be assisted by their help with the Lord in respect of their sins, if they begin to be oppressed with any sickness or risk; when they have made confession, and have received the imposition of hands on them by you in acknowledgment of their penitence, should be remitted to the Lord with the peace promised to them by the martyrs.(St. Cyprian of Carthage, epistle 13)"

A libellus - as those certificates were then called - and an indulgence is pretty much the same. Even Patriarch Dositheos of Jerusalem said that indulgences were an ancient and venerable tradition. I'm not sure whether selling it is a pretty good idea, though,

Do you mean that indulgences was orginally used to honor the martyrs and remind us to made confession, but it later turn as a commodities of Church?

Yes, something like that. Before the martyrs died they sometimes gave a libellus - or indulgence - to the surviving faithful. Sometimes even to people who had lapsed in the persecution. With a libellus their penance was remitted (indulgences do not forgive sins but remit penances) and they were accepted back to communion. The martyrs didn't sell those libelli, AFAIK.

As what I know , The Pope/ Catholic Church can run countries and always have fightings in the Crusades War in medieval. The Catholic Church should always have the financial problem. Is it that Catholic Church turned the indulgence as a commodity in order to resolve its financial problem?

And did Orthodox Church turn absolution Certificate as a commodity, like Catholic Church?

Most of the abuses with Indulgences where just that abuses, they did not have approval of the Catholic Church.  To answer your question though it was not because of the fighting of the crusades, the money was raised often times for the building of churches or for the relief of the poor (like Peters Pence).

[domNoah]

And did Orthodox Church turn absolution Certificate as a commodity, like Catholic Church?

No, but some bishops did.

I see, Just some bishops, not the church as a whole did.

The Orthodox Communions do not have central leadership like the Roman Catholic Church, you must remember that Orthodox practicing inter communion has not always happened.  There is no Eastern Orthodox Pope, saying what the whole Orthodox Church is going to allow or not allow.  Sense the bishop holds primacy in his diocese if they sold indulgences then the Orthodox Church in that diocese approved of the selling of indulgences.

[Cyrillic]

I would like to see your sources for 1, I am aware of the churches in the east allowing separation but not remarriage.  In fact the current discipline on divorce observed in the East is rather current (more than just adultery is considered).

The Moechian controversy of Leo VI the Wise. He was granted three marriages but the fourth was seen as adultry. When he married for the fourth time anyway he incurred the condemnation of the Patriarch and the eastern bishops but the Pope of Rome was so nice as to approve of it when he sent the emperor a dispensation.

3.  We do not view Sundays and Holy Days as being little t tradition.  In the west we attribute it to the Apostolic Constitutions and coming from the Apostles.

Emphasis added. Thanks for confirming my point.

Most of the abuses with Indulgences where just that abuses, they did not have approval of the Catholic Church.

This. The Council of Trent condemned such abuses.

[Justin Kissel]

Does the Catholic Church accept all the Apostolic Constitutions as authoritative, or only part of them as the Orthodox Church does?

[mike]

The Orthodox Communions do not have central leadership like the Roman Catholic Church, you must remember that Orthodox practicing inter communion has not always happened.  There is no Eastern Orthodox Pope, saying what the whole Orthodox Church is going to allow or not allow.

Really?

[Wyatt]

Is there any written works of  Church father mentioning the purgatory?

Many early Fathers speak of a purging or cleansing after death, though there were/are different opinions as to how this takes place.

And where. I don't recall the idea of material created purgatorial fire being an ancient one. And the whole money-making apparatus tied to purgatory was late Medieval.

I don't recall "material created purgatorial fire" being dogma. The way I've heard it explained is that the cleansing fire of purgatory is God Himself.

[Cyrillic]

I don't recall "material created purgatorial fire" being dogma. The way I've heard it explained is that the cleansing fire of purgatory is God Himself.

Wasn't it denied at Florence that the Latins meant a literal fire with purgatory?

[domNoah]

The Orthodox Communions do not have central leadership like the Roman Catholic Church, you must remember that Orthodox practicing inter communion has not always happened.  There is no Eastern Orthodox Pope, saying what the whole Orthodox Church is going to allow or not allow.

Really?

Are you saying that our Lord Jesus Christ is the author of the disunity between the Orthodox on their own disciplines?

[mike]

The Orthodox Communions do not have central leadership like the Roman Catholic Church, you must remember that Orthodox practicing inter communion has not always happened.  There is no Eastern Orthodox Pope, saying what the whole Orthodox Church is going to allow or not allow.

Really?

Are you saying that our Lord Jesus Christ is the author of the disunity between the Orthodox on their own disciplines?

I'm saying He is Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church.

[Wyatt]

I don't recall "material created purgatorial fire" being dogma. The way I've heard it explained is that the cleansing fire of purgatory is God Himself.

Wasn't it denied at Florence that the Latins meant a literal fire with purgatory?

It's quite possible. I would have to read up on it because I am not sure. I know that in Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical Spe Salvi, he mentions that the cleansing fire of purgatory is Christ himself.

[Justin Kissel]

- Of course it's a material purging/cleansing. What else could it be? 

- What "disunity between the Orthodox on their own disciplines"? Things like contraception?

- Regarding Florence, St. Mark of Ephesus certainly attributed that position to them.

[domNoah]

I would like to see your sources for 1, I am aware of the churches in the east allowing separation but not remarriage.  In fact the current discipline on divorce observed in the East is rather current (more than just adultery is considered).

The Moechian controversy of Leo VI the Wise. He was granted three marriages but the fourth was seen as adultry. When he married for the fourth time anyway he incurred the condemnation of the Patriarch and the eastern bishops but the Pope of Rome was so nice as to approve of it when he sent the emperor a dispensation.

3.  We do not view Sundays and Holy Days as being little t tradition.  In the west we attribute it to the Apostolic Constitutions and coming from the Apostles.

Emphasis added. Thanks for confirming my point.

Most of the abuses with Indulgences where just that abuses, they did not have approval of the Catholic Church.

This. The Council of Trent condemned such abuses.

I was speaking in the context of the thread, the question was what are the differences between the East and the West, the Sunday Obligation is clearly a difference.  We believe it is part of big T tradition, you don't.

As far as the Moechian controversy of Leo VI the Wise

1)  First Marriage (wife died)
2)  Second Marriage (wife died)
3)  Third Marriage (wife died)
4)  Fourth Marriage


What does that have to do with Ecclesiastical Divorce?  In the west we don't put a limit on the number or marriages (I guess that is another difference between us) and not only that it shows that the Pope was appealed to as the authority in settling the dispute between him and the Patriarch.

[domNoah]

The Orthodox Communions do not have central leadership like the Roman Catholic Church, you must remember that Orthodox practicing inter communion has not always happened.  There is no Eastern Orthodox Pope, saying what the whole Orthodox Church is going to allow or not allow.

Really?

Are you saying that our Lord Jesus Christ is the author of the disunity between the Orthodox on their own disciplines?

I'm saying He is Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church.

In the context of my previous statement, you do not believe Christ has a vicar on earth that speaks with absolute authority like we Catholics do.  Pinning down Orthodox theology and discipline is like trying to pin down a tomato seed on your plate.

Jesus is not the author of confusion that exists on birth control in your own ranks. While most Catholics are bad on Birth Control there is no confusion at a theological level that it is wrong and the discussion on it is closed.

[Cyrillic]

I was speaking in the context of the thread, the question was what are the differences between the East and the West, the Sunday Obligation is clearly a difference.  We believe it is part of big T tradition, you don't.

Do the EC's even have a sunday obligation? How far back does this specific canon go even for the Latin Church?

- Regarding Florence, St. Mark of Ephesus certainly attributed that position to them.

Wasn't he the same guy who said, at Florence, that every work of the Latin Church Fathers was full of interpolations or else spurious altogether? I'd take everything he said about Latin theology with a huge grain of salt.

[Justin Kissel]

Aww, and I like you. Why do you make me disagree so soon?

Jesus is not the author of confusion that exists on birth control in your own ranks. While most Catholics are bad on Birth Control there is no confusion at a theological level that it is wrong and the discussion on it is closed.

Except that the Roman Catholic writer John Noonan shows (rightly) than NFP would have been considered contraception by the early Fathers. And lets not do a "No True Scotsman" argument either -- "oh, if this Noonan fellow were a real Catholic he'd not have said that".  Noonan wrote one of the best studies on the subject in English, but the facts are fairly simple: the early Church Fathers didn't use all sorts of distinctions to allow for a certain kind of birth control; if you went about your sex life in such a way as to increase the chances of avoiding procreation then you were using contraception. Of course, admittedly, this is very similar to divorce and remarriage, so at least Catholics are consistent. 

[Justin Kissel]

Wasn't he the same guy who said, at Florence, that every work of the Latin Church Fathers was full of interpolations or else spurious altogether? I'd take everything he said about Latin theology with a huge grain of salt.

I don't recall... but seeing as how he was the only major figure (that I can recall, anyway) who stood in the way of union, and led the fight afterwards, let's not dismiss him so quickly...? 

[Cyrillic]

Wasn't he the same guy who said, at Florence, that every work of the Latin Church Fathers was full of interpolations or else spurious altogether? I'd take everything he said about Latin theology with a huge grain of salt.

I don't recall...

It's written on many scrolls in his icons.

[Justin Kissel]

It's written on many scrolls in his icons.

It's all Greek to me... 

[Cyrillic]

It's written on many scrolls in his icons.

It's all Greek to me... 

That's what St. Mark of Ephesus must have said when the works of the Latin fathers were presented to him 

Aww, and I like you. Why do you make me disagree so soon?

Jesus is not the author of confusion that exists on birth control in your own ranks. While most Catholics are bad on Birth Control there is no confusion at a theological level that it is wrong and the discussion on it is closed.

Except that the Roman Catholic writer John Noonan shows (rightly) than NFP would have been considered contraception by the early Fathers. And lets not do a "No True Scotsman" argument either -- "oh, if this Noonan fellow were a real Catholic he'd not have said that".  Noonan wrote one of the best studies on the subject in English, but the facts are fairly simple: the early Church Fathers didn't use all sorts of distinctions to allow for a certain kind of birth control; if you went about your sex life in such a way as to increase the chances of avoiding procreation then you were using contraception. Of course, admittedly, this is very similar to divorce and remarriage, so at least Catholics are consistent. 

Allowing NFP does indeed sound quite hypocritical.

[domNoah]

Aww, and I like you. Why do you make me disagree so soon?

Jesus is not the author of confusion that exists on birth control in your own ranks. While most Catholics are bad on Birth Control there is no confusion at a theological level that it is wrong and the discussion on it is closed.

Except that the Roman Catholic writer John Noonan shows (rightly) than NFP would have been considered contraception by the early Fathers. And lets not do a "No True Scotsman" argument either -- "oh, if this Noonan fellow were a real Catholic he'd not have said that".  Noonan wrote one of the best studies on the subject in English, but the facts are fairly simple: the early Church Fathers didn't use all sorts of distinctions to allow for a certain kind of birth control; if you went about your sex life in such a way as to increase the chances of avoiding procreation then you were using contraception. Of course, admittedly, this is very similar to divorce and remarriage, so at least Catholics are consistent. 

First I would like to say that to use NFP without a grave reason is a grave/mortal sin.

NFP is not at the same level of using Artificial methods of Birth Control because the essence of the act of martial relations is not frustrated. It is not sinful for a married couple to have relations during times of the month when the women is less likely to become pregnant.  It can be a mortal sin if the primary end of doing it is evil (selfishness, greed), not avoiding some evil (another child reducing the couple to abject poverty, government forced abortion, frail health of the women etc)

Divine revelation in Genesis 38 shows that God however harshly punishes any attempts to frustrate procreation by the spilling of seed, which in essence is what the use of condemns does.  It appears to break the natural law, because the essence of the marital act is for the man to put seed in the women which can result in a pregnancy.  The Catholic Church has always been consistent in its condemnation of the spilling of seed and of birth control.  NFP is an allowance  because the couple still copulates in a manner that still allows for pregnancy to happen and does not involve the loss of seed.

To my knowledge the Orthodox communions initially supported Paul VI Humane Vitae, but later in 2000 the Russian Synod allowed condoms.  However, I would describe what I have observed from being an outsider that there is harsh tension in the Orthodox community over the sinfulness of the act and to what degree it is a sin.  You have a local pastor in my area Father Josiah Trenham (Antiochian Orthodox St Andrews Riverside) who absolutely condemns any form of birth control, and to my knowledge I know Bishop Hilarion also is opposed to birth control.  Everyone one else is either silent or invokes "economia".

My point when I said that our Lord Jesus Christ is not the author of this confusion was to point out that in the Catholic Church the Pope has ruled definitively on the matter that all forms of artificial contraception are evil.   So it is safe to say the Catholic Church opposes artificial birth control, but you cannot say the Orthodox allows artificial birth control nor the Orthodox condemns artificial birth control because many voices without any absolute authority say different things.

SN I would be interested in a citation from the book Noonan wrote were he concludes that periodic continence would have been condemned by all the early fathers.  I am aware of some of the strict writings from the Fathers on matters like relations during Pregnancy and some of their very harsh comments about marriage but I would like to know more.

[domNoah]

I was speaking in the context of the thread, the question was what are the differences between the East and the West, the Sunday Obligation is clearly a difference.  We believe it is part of big T tradition, you don't.

Do the EC's even have a sunday obligation? How far back does this specific canon go even for the Latin Church?

- Regarding Florence, St. Mark of Ephesus certainly attributed that position to them.

Wasn't he the same guy who said, at Florence, that every work of the Latin Church Fathers was full of interpolations or else spurious altogether? I'd take everything he said about Latin theology with a huge grain of salt.

As a discipline it goes back to the Apostles, I would have to look up how far the Canon goes back.  Eastern Catholics do have the Sunday Obligation requirement because it is one of the 6 precepts of the Church that all Catholics must obey.  I believe they have certain allowances granted (such as I think they are allowed to attend a Vespers service as an alternative to Divine Liturgy though I do not know for sure).

[Justin Kissel]

domNoah,

Thank you for your well thought out post. I think you make particularly good points about things being definitive in Catholicism and unclear in Orthodoxy. I will (hopefully) come back tomorrow and post a bit more, but for right now I'll provide a couple quotes from Noonan. I no longer have the book in question, so I'm stuck with what little I typed into a notepad file, but fwiw here's what I found that might be relevant...

"'Contraception is a term which could be applied to any behavior that prevents conception. Sexual continence is contraceptive in effect; sexual intercourse when an ovum will not be fertilized avoids procreation as much as intercourse where a physical barrier is used to prevent the meeting of spermatozoa and ovum." - John T. Noonan, Contraception: A History of Its Treatment By the Catholic Theologians and Canonists, (Harvard University Press, 1965), p. 1

"In addition to these three chemical or mechanical ways of blocking conception, there was belief in a sterile period for women... Indeed, the first of the several contraceptive measures which Soranos prescribes is avoidance of 'sexual intercourse at those periods which we said were suitable for conception' (Gynecology 1.19.61)" - John T. Noonan, Contraception: A History of Its Treatment By the Catholic Theologians and Canonists, (Harvard University Press, 1965), p. 16

"The method of contraception practiced by these Manichees whom Augustine knew is the use of the sterile period as determined by Greek medicine... In the history of the thought of theologians on contraception, it is, no doubt, piquant that the first pronouncement on contraception by the most influential theologian teaching on such matters should be such a vigorous attack on the one method of avoiding procreation accepted by twentieth-century Catholic theologians as morally lawful." - John T. Noonan, Contraception: A History of Its Treatment By the Catholic Theologians and Canonists, (Harvard University Press, 1965), p. 120

"...once married, one may not avoid children. It is lawless and shameful to lie with one's wife where the conception of offspring is avoided: 'This is what Onan, the son of Juda, did, and God killed him for it.' You may marry to give an outlet to your incontinence, 'but you ought not to temper your evil so that you exterminate the good of marriage, that is, the propagation of children' (Augustine, Adulterous Marriages, 2, 12, 12)" - John T. Noonan, Contraception: A History of Its Treatment By the Catholic Theologians and Canonists, (Harvard University Press, 1965), p. 137

[walter1234]

And did Orthodox Church turn absolution Certificate as a commodity, like Catholic Church?

No, but some bishops did.

I see, Just some bishops, not the church as a whole did.

The Orthodox Communions do not have central leadership like the Roman Catholic Church, you must remember that Orthodox practicing inter communion has not always happened.  There is no Eastern Orthodox Pope, saying what the whole Orthodox Church is going to allow or not allow.  Sense the bishop holds primacy in his diocese if they sold indulgences then the Orthodox Church in that diocese approved of the selling of indulgences.

I don't think the views, teachings or approval of some falliable bishops can represent the whole Orthodox Church.

[walter1234]

Do Catholic christians believe church is infallible ,like Orthodoxy ?

[Cyrillic]

Do Catholic christians believe church is infallible ,like Orthodoxy ?

Yes.

[walter1234]

Do Catholic christians believe church is infallible ,like Orthodoxy ?

Yes.

How do they explain their mistakes which made in medieval,e.g power struggle between pope and emperors  ,killed the Jews,crusades wars,etc?

Its faith and doctrines also keep changing , how do they explain?

I remember Catholic church even murdered the scientists who claimed the earth is in circle/oval shape in medieval when I learned history in college.(the faith that  built upon the Science....)

[Cyrillic]

Do Catholic christians believe church is infallible ,like Orthodoxy ?

Yes.

How do they explain their mistakes which made in medieval,e.g power struggle between pope and emperors  ,killed the Jews,crusades wars,etc?

Because they (and the Orthodox) claim to be infallible only in matters of faith.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Orthodox-Catholic Discussion (Moderator: username!) > Topic: the similiarity and difference between Orthodoxy and catholic