If you desire to suggest that Orthodoxy is 'structured' as the Trinity then you would have to have either 3 or 1 unless you believe the Trinity is more than 3?
With regards to the 'unity in diversity' I get the impression that you are suggesting God (i.e. Trinity) is not of 'one mind' and 'one will'. Is this correct? When you attribute 'unity in diversity' to the Trinity, what do you mean by that?
I said it is based on the Triune nature of God in which there is university in diversity, and that each member is of the Trinity is completely God. I stated that the word ‘Catholic’ as first applied meant complete. I showed how each church headed by a bishop is thus complete, or Catholic, in that no one church has more ‘power’ than any of the others. I don’t know what more I can say to that effect. The unity in diversity in which no one is greater than the other, in which all contain the fullness of belief is what I’ve already stressed.
I also have never said anything about God not being of one will; in fact I referred to the church (as a parallel of God) being of one accord; in communion, as being ‘Catholic’.
I'm not here to represent Catholicism. I'm not an apologist for the papacy. As I've said to a couple other individuals on this forum every Catholic is not a two-dimensional carbon-copy of the Magisterium. We are 'individuals' just like you and everyone else. We read the Bible, pray, and try to live the beatitudes.
As a largely contemplative Catholic with deep Baptist roots I am 'unique' just they way God made me. Kind of like a snowflake...
If you desire to know my views on a subject you shouldn't 'assume' what I believe but you should ask me.
When I said you, I was referring to you as a group. I said you catholics. I can argue about what Catholics per se believe and you (as Catholics) believe that the Pope is a super-bishop. If you wish to distance yourself (as an individual) from you (Catholics as a group) believe then perhaps calling yourself Catholic at all is not helpful. You state that you are Catholic. I state the differences between Catholics and Orthodox. That is as simple as I wanted this to be. Instead you now have me explaining further the nature of Orthodox belief for which I think is best done in other threads per the very topics you wanted explained.
So then that begs the question 'Why did Jesus have to die'? You appear to be falling into an old Muslim trap. If God is Love then 'Why did Jesus have to die'?
Out of an act of love. He came to restore nature. He didn’t do so because He felt slighted and could only be satisfied by a payment of Himself. What ‘Muslim trap’ are you referring to?
In a more complete understanding the attributes of God, He is also Just. His Love cannot make Him less Just nor can His Righteousness make Him less Loving and Merciful but we cannot simply look a one attribute of God as if it is the whole.
But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement. - Romans 5:8-11
So I ask you to reflect on 'Why did Jesus have to die'? What did 'atonement' mean in Semitic culture?
Jesus died to restore us. It was an act of love for us. So that we might be able to put on Christ (Gal. 3:27) by being united with a restored nature in an act called theosis. As Ireneaus said “God became man that man may become God”
But anyway, we’ve moved from me stating that Orthodox and Catholics have a different notion of salvation, to you asking me to defend the Orthodox notion of salvation, which is not my intent. It was to show that we have differences in understanding. The act of theosis, it’s merits (as regards arguing for it) are actually then a different topic.
But you can view a discussion on this matter at http://www.angelfire.com/ny4/djw/lutherantheology.stuckwisch.html
Which states in partÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚Â¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¦
Deification reflects the paradoxical Johannine affirmation that the “Word was God” and that it “became flesh” (John 1:1,14), so that created human beings might not boast in the face of God in their “fleshly” nature, but be “in Christ Jesus” (1 Cor 1:29-30), members of His Body, anticipating the eschatological fulfillment when God will be “all in all” (1 Cor 15:28). (Meyendorff, “Theosis”: 471)
Thus, Deification “reflects the experience of Christ’s divinity.” God became man, and the Son of God assumed human mortality, so that by His life, death and Resurrection He might become the first of a new, deified humanity. He is the New Adam -- the Forerunner, the Trailblazer, the Firstborn of mankind in communion with God. (Meyendorff, “Theosis”: 471)
“In the Orthodox understanding Christianity signifies not merely an adherence to certain dogmas, not merely an exterior imitation of Christ through moral effort, but direct union with the living God, the total transformation of the human person by divine grace and glory -- what the Greek fathers termed ‘deification’...(theosis).” The most important Scriptural foundation for this doctrine of Deification is ii Peter 1:3-4, but passages with similar connotations are also considered, e.g., Psalm 82:6, John 14:17, Romans 8:11, i John 3:2, etc. “Salvation is understood to mean ‘participation’ or ‘sharing’ or ‘fellowship’ with God, or ‘indwelling’ in the words of the Gospel of John.” Salvation as Deification does not imply that created human beings “become God” in a pantheistic sense. On the contrary, Deification takes place when believers “let God be God” for them, that is, when they “enter into a personal relationship with God through Baptism and participate fully in God’s life through the sacraments in the church, the body of Christ.” (Salvation: 19-20).
See also http://www.wcc-coe.org/wcc/what/ecumenical/o-e.html