# Humanities & Anthropology > Philosophy >  Orthodoxy and Catholicism: From Separation to Unification

## Echetlaeus

Is that possible in the new era?

----------


## Twilight

As a Catholic myself, I never heard anything about reunification however I'm surea catholic priest and Pope Franciscan shed some light :)

----------


## Oasis

I heard about it long time ago once and another time couple years ago. I don't think it will ever happen because there are too many differences and conflicts between the two. I don't think the pope believes in it either.

----------


## hgfds

No because the division is too deep

----------


## srdceleva

Im not sure what everyone else is talking about in the above posts. I think it is a huge possiblilty in the future, and Im almost certain it will eventually happen. This is a massively discussed topic in the catholic church, contrary to what the other catholic mentioned on here. First of besides ancient predjudices that still persist in local (orthodox) poopulations among the lay people (and some clergy) the relationships between the two churches is at an all time high. If it wasnt for the russian orthodox church, who is the most anti rome and west from all the orthodox churches and the most powerful , they may have joined up a long time ago. Patriarch bartholomew who is technically the first among equals of the orthodox church and its symbolic head is very close to the pope and is very positive towards the catholic church calling Rome the older brother. I saw a video of the patriarch of bulgaria meeting pope benedikt 16 and he literally knelt down and kissed the Popes ring. There was also a meeting of many orthodox bishops and Patriarchs( not russian) where they all agreed that the Roman pontiff was historically the head of the church and not just first among equals, but they disagree on how that is played out in the church and on papal infallibility. Pope J P 2 even said he would be wiling to limit some of his papal powers if it meant unity with the eastern church. 

To the people who said there are too many differences....the differences in beliefs are very minute and scrupulous, the faiths are almost exactly the same, just with different liturgies. The main obstacle is the Papacy and its role in the world church. I see this as a big possibility in the future and i hope i see it in my life time.

----------


## srdceleva

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up_yH51PAqc

----------


## Angela

> Im not sure what everyone else is talking about in the above posts. I think it is a huge possiblilty in the future, and Im almost certain it will eventually happen. This is a massively discussed topic in the catholic church, contrary to what the other catholic mentioned on here. First of besides ancient predjudices that still persist in local (orthodox) poopulations among the lay people (and some clergy) the relationships between the two churches is at an all time high. If it wasnt for the russian orthodox church, who is the most anti rome and west from all the orthodox churches and the most powerful , they may have joined up a long time ago. Patriarch bartholomew who is technically the first among equals of the orthodox church and its symbolic head is very close to the pope and is very positive towards the catholic church calling Rome the older brother. I saw a video of the patriarch of bulgaria meeting pope benedikt 16 and he literally knelt down and kissed the Popes ring. There was also a meeting of many orthodox bishops and Patriarchs( not russian) where they all agreed that the Roman pontiff was historically the head of the church and not just first among equals, but they disagree on how that is played out in the church and on papal infallibility. Pope J P 2 even said he would be wiling to limit some of his papal powers if it meant unity with the eastern church. 
> 
> To the people who said there are too many differences....the differences in beliefs are very minute and scrupulous, the faiths are almost exactly the same, just with different liturgies. The main obstacle is the Papacy and its role in the world church. I see this as a big possibility in the future and i hope i see it in my life time.


I completely agree. Even back when I was a girl in high school we would have regular ecumenical services with the Orthodox church in our community. We were taught that if we couldn't find a Catholic church while traveling to look for an Orthodox one, and take communion there.

People who aren't really versed in theology and the history of the rift don't really understand how small the gap is, and if they're not actively involved in the religious life of either community then they don't realize how much progress has already been made toward re-unification.

----------


## DuPidh

> I completely agree. Even back when I was a girl in high school we would have regular ecumenical services with the Orthodox church in our community. We were taught that if we couldn't find a Catholic church while traveling to look for an Orthodox one, and take communion there.
> 
> People who aren't really versed in theology and the history of the rift don't really understand how small the gap is, and if they're not actively involved in the religious life of either community then they don't realize how much progress has already been made toward re-unification.


I have heard that orthodoxy dogma is also very similar to Islamic one, the moderate Islamist. The biggest distance is between Catholics and Islam. This is the view among the impartial people who study theology. Orthodoxy is also violent at times.

----------


## Angela

> I have heard that orthodoxy dogma is also very similar to Islamic one, the moderate Islamist. The biggest distance is between Catholics and Islam. *This is the view among the impartial people who study theology.* Orthodoxy is also violent at times.


Anyone who told you that has never read a theology book in their lives. They've also perhaps been living in Skinner's box for their entire lives. 

Are you aware that Islam doesn't recognize the divinity of Christ? Are you aware that this is the central belief of all Christians? How could Orthodox Catholicism be very close to Islam? That's absolutely mad.

There are no major differences between the beliefs of Orthodox Catholics and Roman Catholics, as was pointed out by another poster, other than the infallibility of the Pope. The rest is just liturgical differences.

"Are Catholics and Orthodox truly that different? For half a century now the two sides have been referring to each other officially as sister churches. *A list of theological sticking points looks relatively short, and the Catholic understanding of papal supremacy is generally agreed to be the greatest difficulty.* Old disputes over the _filioque clause in the Nicene Creed (the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son) and the modern Roman dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption, both about Mary, are usually agreed by ecumenical cognoscenti to be subspecies of the problem of papal assertions. No one thinks this division can be solved entirely on a theological level. There are political wounds to be healed as well, especially over perceived proselytism by Catholics, most notably in the case of the Uniate Eastern Catholic churches."_ 

"Two major cultural differences can be detected in the way Orthodox and Catholics live out their visions of Christianity. The first includes attitudes toward liturgy."

The other difference relates to things like fasting and prayer rituals.

http://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2007/12/03/what-divides-orthodox-and-catholics-how-faithful-can-foster-ecumenism-level-church

The basic problem is politics, with the Russian Orthodox Church throwing up roadblocks. Even that patriarch doesn't point out major theological differences and would I'm sure be absolutely horrified that his religion is close in terms of dogma to Islam.

Where are these unbiased *theologians* who think that the dogma of the Orthodox churches is close to Islam or that there are huge differences in dogma between Roman and Orthodox Catholics? You had better be prepared to cite your sources when you make a preposterous claim like that. I want the links to these theologians please. If you can't do it, stop repeating misinformation.

----------


## LABERIA

> I completely agree. Even back when I was a girl in high school we would have regular ecumenical services with the Orthodox church in our community. We were taught that if we couldn't find a Catholic church while traveling to look for an Orthodox one, and take communion there.
> 
> People who aren't really versed in theology and the history of the rift *don't really understand how small the gap* is, and if they're not actively involved in the religious life of either community then they don't realize how much progress has already been made toward re-unification.


The gap is political, not theological.

----------


## DuPidh

> Anyone who told you that has never read a theology book in their lives. They've also perhaps been living in Skinner's box for their entire lives. 
> 
> Are you aware that Islam doesn't recognize the divinity of Christ? Are you aware that this is the central belief of all Christians? How could Orthodox Catholicism be very close to Islam? That's absolutely mad.
> 
> There are no major differences between the beliefs of Orthodox Catholics and Roman Catholics, as was pointed out by another poster, other than the infallibility of the Pope. The rest is just liturgical differences.
> 
> "Are Catholics and Orthodox truly that different? For half a century now the two sides have been referring to each other officially as sister churches. *A list of theological sticking points looks relatively short, and the Catholic understanding of papal supremacy is generally agreed to be the greatest difficulty.* Old disputes over the _filioque clause in the Nicene Creed (the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son) and the modern Roman dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption, both about Mary, are usually agreed by ecumenical cognoscenti to be subspecies of the problem of papal assertions. No one thinks this division can be solved entirely on a theological level. There are political wounds to be healed as well, especially over perceived proselytism by Catholics, most notably in the case of the Uniate Eastern Catholic churches."_ 
> 
> "Two major cultural differences can be detected in the way Orthodox and Catholics live out their visions of Christianity. The first includes attitudes toward liturgy."
> ...


 You did not get my point or I did not explained clearly.!
If you take the Islamic philosophy, the way of thinking, is very similar with Orthodox way of thinking. Similar does not mean The same. Of course they have different characters in play, and different narratives how events unfolded, but at the end they produce very similar behavior among their followers. Both philosophies lead to violence. Let say the spiritual philosophy of Russians is Orthodoxy. Look how violent their behavior is, look what they are doing to their fellow Ukrainians. The same does not happen between fellow Catholic countries. Let say France and Italy are not fighting over the city of Nice, even though Nice is an Italian city because they share the philosophy of peace. You see why I am saying the dogma of Islam and that of Orthodoxy produce the same behavior thats why they are similar.

----------


## Yetos

> You did not get my point or I did not explained clearly.!
> If you take the Islamic philosophy, the way of thinking, is very similar with Orthodox way of thinking. Similar does not mean The same. Of course they have different characters in play, and different narratives how events unfolded, but at the end they produce very similar behavior among their followers. Both philosophies lead to violence. Let say the spiritual philosophy of Russians is Orthodoxy. Look how violent their behavior is, look what they are doing to their fellow Ukrainians. The same does not happen between fellow Catholic countries. Let say France and Italy are not fighting over the city of Nice, even though Nice is an Italian city because they share the philosophy of peace. You see why I am saying the dogma of Islam and that of Orthodoxy produce the same behavior thats why they are similar.




Someone must read history again.

Austria Italy and France are all catholics,
but how may wars have among them?
at least the time of Napoleon,

Religious wars are over in modern Europe, except Balkans
which always is back or ahead of rest EU.
Balkans can be 200 years behind rest Europe and same time 100 years infront.

anyway the first effort was done around 1440 AD with pope Eugenios 5 at Ferarra-Florentia 
the next happeneδ at 5 january at 1964 at Jerusalem 
and the last this year 2016 also at Jerusalem 

Happens or not has no meaning,
at least for me since both are christians, but both are corporations,

But the stupidity that Orthodox are like Islam or near Islam
*IS THE STUPIEST THING I HEARD AT THE FORUM.
Maybe the writer believes that at East church countries exist Sharia Law. !!!!!!
or that at Orthodox comunities they stone for punishement


so
So outside Orthodox churches we see such views correct Dupidh?
*


and maybe at the hospitals of Orthodox countries the common view is this

----------


## srdceleva

> You did not get my point or I did not explained clearly.!
> If you take the Islamic philosophy, the way of thinking, is very similar with Orthodox way of thinking. Similar does not mean The same. Of course they have different characters in play, and different narratives how events unfolded, but at the end they produce very similar behavior among their followers. Both philosophies lead to violence. Let say the spiritual philosophy of Russians is Orthodoxy. Look how violent their behavior is, look what they are doing to their fellow Ukrainians. The same does not happen between fellow Catholic countries. Let say France and Italy are not fighting over the city of Nice, even though Nice is an Italian city because they share the philosophy of peace. You see why I am saying the dogma of Islam and that of Orthodoxy produce the same behavior thats why they are similar.


the teachings of orthodoxy have absolutely nothing to do with violence and no more in common with islam than catholocism. Violent wars that accured recently were due to the collapse of yugoslavia and were almost entirely political. The balkans has historically been divided based on tribal and religious affiliation so naturaly that plays into it, but the wars themselves were political. Also, Islam was part of all of that too, not just orthodoxy. To claim orthodoxy is closer to islam than catholocism, is like claiming soccer in spain is closer to cricket than soccer in england is.

----------


## DuPidh

> the teachings of orthodoxy have absolutely nothing to do with violence and no more in common with islam than catholocism. Violent wars that accured recently were due to the collapse of yugoslavia and were almost entirely political. The balkans has historically been divided based on tribal and religious affiliation so naturaly that plays into it, but the wars themselves were political. Also, Islam was part of all of that too, not just orthodoxy. To claim orthodoxy is closer to islam than catholocism, is like claiming soccer in spain is closer to cricket than soccer in england is.


 Don't get me wrong! I am an atheist with no knowledge about religions. But the scholars find many common points between Islam and Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy coexist in many Islamic countries with Islam. That's not the point with Catholicism. Let say you have orthodox people in Lebanon who coexist with Islam. This does not translate with christian girls going out on miniskirts and Muslim girls on hijab. They both appear in public similar and have the same way of thinking. I am not saying that Christians preach for Mohammad, but they also show prejudice against women.

----------


## Angela

> Don't get me wrong! I am an atheist with no knowledge about religions. But the scholars find many common points between Islam and Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy coexist in many Islamic countries with Islam. That's not the point with Catholicism. Let say you have orthodox people in Lebanon who coexist with Islam. This does not translate with christian girls going out on miniskirts and Muslim girls on hijab. They both appear in public similar and have the same way of thinking. I am not saying that Christians preach for Mohammad, but they also show prejudice against women.


You have failed to produce links to statements by theologians which support your view. Now you claim that scholars support your view. Please provide the appropriate links, or admit that they don't exist and your statement was incorrect.

As for the remainder of your post it's absolutely false. Are you aware that a good number of the churches in the East are in fact in communion with the Roman church and merely maintain a different liturgy?

Where you have gotten the absurd idea that Eastern Christian women follow Muslim codes in dress other than out of fear of harassment and worse I have no idea.

----------


## Yetos

> Don't get me wrong! I am an atheist with no knowledge about religions. But the scholars find many common points between Islam and Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy coexist in many Islamic countries with Islam. That's not the point with Catholicism. Let say you have orthodox people in Lebanon who coexist with Islam. This does not translate with christian girls going out on miniskirts and Muslim girls on hijab. They both appear in public similar and have the same way of thinking. I am not saying that Christians preach for Mohammad, but they also show prejudice against women.


Oh 
so there are not Catholics at Syrria (hundreds thousands, 2-3% of Population) in fact they are Greek catholic not Roman Catholic
there are not Catholics at Lebanon and Palaistine
there not Catholics at Turkey, or Egypt
there are not Catholics at Nigera Malli Nigeria
there not catholics at Kenya or Somalia
etc etc etc


Orthodox of Syrria




Melekite Greek catholic of Syrria




*and an old photo from Maronites Catholics (ex-monothelitisms)
maybe they look like Turks? or Greeks or Cypriots or Egyptians? with the Fez on head*


Dupidh from their look and dress do you believe thay are not Christians?
cause they are not dressed like Europeans?


just for your info
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_Syria

----------


## Angela

> Oh 
> so there are not Catholics at Syrria (hundreds thousands, 2-3% of Population)
> there are not Catholics at Lebanon and Palaistine
> there not Catholics at Turkey,
> there are not Catholics at Nigera Malli Nigeria
> there not catholics at Kenya or Somalia
> etc etc etc


Most people, Americans, in particular, have no clue that there are churches in the east and other parts of the world which don't follow the Roman "rite" or liturgy, but who are nevertheless in total communion with Roman Catholics, accepting the supremacy of the Pope. The Orthodox are a different matter, but still very close. Regardless, the very idea that Orthodox Catholic Christianity teaches the same kinds of attitudes or accepts the behaviors of, say, not even Isis, but even Wahabism, for example, is nonsense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Catholic_Churches

By the way, the Maronite church to which the Lebanese Christians belong has always remained in total communion with the "Latin" Roman Catholic church. 

Beirut, with its many Christian Lebanese, used to be a very cosmopolitan city from all I've heard and read, the "Paris" of the Near East. No more, unfortunately. 

Look at these pictures of Beirut in 1965, before the Civil War, and think of it today. It also doesn't look to me like they were following "Muslim" codes of dress. 
http://www.businessinsider.com/photo...-middle-east-7

----------


## Yetos

> Most people, Americans, in particular, have no clue that there are churches in the east and other parts of the world which don't follow the Roman "rite" or liturgy, but who are nevertheless in total communion with Roman Catholics, accepting the supremacy of the Pope. The Orthodox are a different matter, but still very close. Regardless, the very idea that Orthodox Catholic Christianity teaches the same kinds of attitudes or accepts the behaviors of, say, not even Isis, but even Wahabism, for example, is nonsense.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Catholic_Churches
> 
> By the way, the Maronite church to which the Lebanese Christians belong has always remained in total communion with the "Latin" Roman Catholic church. 
> 
> Beirut, with its many Christian Lebanese, used to be a very cosmopolitan city from all I've heard and read, the "Paris" of the Near East. No more, unfortunately. 
> 
> Look at these pictures of Beirut in 1965, before the Civil War, and think of it today. It also doesn't look to me like they were following "Muslim" codes of dress. 
> http://www.businessinsider.com/photo...-middle-east-7



Melekites or Melkite are Greek Catholics
Maronites are ex-Monothelitism who enter Roman-Catholic

etc are Chaldeans in Iraq 
Armenian Catholics 

at Near East and middle East due to old teaches of Monophysites, Nestorianism Eutuchianism etc etc 
and due to Crusades and Islam many things that are strange to our eyes you will see.
*
Christianity in Antiocheia is older than Alexandreia and Rome,
Edessa and Antiocheia are the second after Jerusalem in chronological time 
*In fact Rome is the last city that the apostoloi step, but founded by Peter,

so at the eyes of a typical Catholic or an Orthodox that converted by Rome or Nova Rome, a western these christianity seems and sounds strange,

anyway, it seems that no matter a pagan, i know more about christianity, than many in the forum.


these are chants of Catholics at Syria




As you see Christian is not only Romano-Latin and Greek-Koine language

These are also Catholic, Arabic
when I hear them I think I am in an orthodox church,
just hear them, and hear an Orthodox liturgy after,
it is the same feeling,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T04Y..._bQdSE1gh7qEGk

----------


## Boreas

*Islam - Catholic*

Language perspective is similar. Praying in Arabic and Latin. Turkey tried to change pray language as Turkish pray call(ezan), but it didn't succes. So both religion have same perspective in this case.

*Islam - Protestan*

There is no marriage ban
*
Islam - Orthodox Christianity

*Maybe something with Sunni Islam/Orthodox Islam

Hıdırellez and St. George day is common festival.

*Islam - Eastern Orthodox
*
Especially, Eastern Orthodox christian who lives in Middle East are more similar with Islam then the others in community/cultural rules. It is effect of living side by side. 

and I know that there Christians who believe that Jesus was just a man and prophet as in Islam.

but I don't see clear similarity between Islam and one Christianity branch.

----------


## Angela

> *Islam - Catholic*
> 
> Language perspective is similar. *Praying in Arabic and Latin.* Turkey tried to change pray language as Turkish pray call(ezan), but it didn't succes. So both religion have same perspective in this case.
> 
> *Islam - Protestan*
> 
> There is no marriage ban
> *
> Islam - Orthodox Christianity
> ...


Latin hasn't been used in Roman Catholic liturgy or prayer for decades, not since Vatican II.

As for your second bolded comment, whatever those people claim they are, whatever they were born or raised, they're not Christians, and I include in that members of Unitarian churches. It's like saying you don't believe Mohammed is the Prophet, but you're still a Muslim.

To be a Christian one has to believe in some version of the Nicene Creed. It's part of Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Protestantism etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed

This is the Roman Catholic version. It's recited by everyone at every single Mass.

"We believe in one God, 
the Father, the Almighty,
Maker of all that is, seen and unseen. 

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial
of one Being with the Father. 

Through him all things were made. 

For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man. 

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried. 

On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father. 

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end. 

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son. 

With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. 

He has spoken through the Prophets. 

We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. 

We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. 

We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen."

I'm fully aware there are lots of "Cafeteria Catholics" around; I used to be one myself. That's ok, in my opinion, when you're talking about rules and traditions that have accrued around the religion, like male clergy being celibate, or birth control etc. It's different when you find you can't believe in the central dogmas of the faith; then you should get out, which is what I did.

----------


## Yetos

I think history of Churches and religion should be teached at Schools,

Wars happened from the ignorance and fear of people,

*Personally I believe that History of at least big and established religions should taught at Schools,
*Not the Dogma, but the history
just to avoid situations that sprung from ignorance.

for example the title of Papa (pope) 
which is not only the Patriarch of Rome, but also of Alexandreia
or the authorities of Patriarchs (Papa included, he is a Patriarch) (named as Σταυροπηγιακα)
to send a cross to put at foundation of a church building, simmilar to Roman empire emperors who send the first stone, the Anguli, 
and the symbolic Αγιον Μυρον (holy perfume) which is a kind of αυτοκεφαλον, of shelf indipedence but under apostolical continuity

etc etc

the story has 
first patriarchate Jerusalem 
then Antiocheia
then Alexandreia 
then Rome 
4 in Number

the new ones
Rome gave birth to Nova Roma
After this used the principle of Cardinals
a title if I remember correct equal to Archbishop but with limited priviledges of a Patriarch etc etc
Cardo is simmilar to Αrch- Αρχη-Αρχαι

Nova Roma gave birth to 
Serbia 
Moscow Russia
Romania

lately Bulgariadeclare Patriarchate,

Armenian church 
is another story,
But is the third church that holds 'spears' Λογχη' at Jerusalem Holy Grave tomb
which makes it a strong one historically

Coptic church is another story mainly around Egypt,

Other Historical churches,
they are some in number
around Egypt and Near-East Middle East
like the Chaldean, Maronites, Melkite, etc etc
the Arianism Monophysistism Nestorianism etc 
inherite a lot of theoritical problems there
which with the expand and Dominion of Islam there 
created many churches and Dogmas there,
in the eyes of a Western Christian,
might be seen as peculiar

Reformation and Protestantism
that is another story away from this post,
so I will not expand to that

----------


## Angela

> I think history of Churches and religion should be teached at Schools,
> 
> Wars happened from the ignorance and fear of people,
> 
> *Personally I believe that History of at least big and established religions should taught at Schools,
> *Not the Dogma, but the history
> just to avoid situations that sprung from ignorance.
> 
> for example the title of Papa (pope) 
> ...


I agree with you. To a large extent the history of Europe is the history of Christianity. As you say, in a pluralistic society such as that of the U.S. it shouldn't be about indoctrination into dogma; it should be about teaching the history of western civilization, and you can't teach that without teaching the history of Christianity. You also can't teach the history of the Near East without teaching about it, as well as about Islam. 

Unfortunately, from what I can tell history is less and less a part of the curriculum. It's much more about teaching "pluralism". What's the point of teaching pluralism if you understand nothing of the past of any of these groups of people. It's just absurd. 

American television does a lot of "on the street" interviews with people not about ancient of medieval history, but about American history. It's only about a 300 year period, for goodness' sakes, and the level of ignorance is astounding. I literally can't watch these segments. I don't find it at all funny; it's sad.

----------


## DuPidh

> *Islam - Catholic*
> 
> Language perspective is similar. Praying in Arabic and Latin. Turkey tried to change pray language as Turkish pray call(ezan), but it didn't succes. So both religion have same perspective in this case.
> 
> *Islam - Protestan*
> 
> There is no marriage ban
> *
> Islam - Orthodox Christianity
> ...




Its not only the fact that they live side by side what makes them similar. Its the fact that Islam is a much younger religion than Christianity. Its about 700 years younger I think. People who become Muslims belonged to Orthodox Christianity before they made the transition to Islam. So many Orthodox teachings were adopted to Islam. Is it a coincidence that Islam also accepts that very first people who appeared on earth were Eva and Adam? So that is why there is a striking similarity among both religions Islam and Orthodoxy. The only difference is that Christ speaks for Orthodoxy and Mohamed for Islam, but they say almost the same thing even though they lived different lives. Largely Islam was born out of Orthodox teachings with minor differences.

----------


## Angela

> Its not only the fact that they live side by side what makes them similar. Its the fact that Islam is a much younger religion than Christianity. Its about 700 years younger I think. People who become Muslims belonged to Orthodox Christianity before they made the transition to Islam. So many Orthodox teachings were adopted to Islam. Is it a coincidence that Islam also accepts that very first people who appeared on earth were Eva and Adam? So that is why there is a striking similarity among both religions Islam and Orthodoxy. The only difference is that Christ speaks for Orthodoxy and Mohamed for Islam, but they say almost the same thing even though they lived different lives. Largely Islam was born out of Orthodox teachings with minor differences.


Can you please pick up a book on these subjects so that you don't make these kinds of egregious errors? 

*There was no Orthodox Christianity when Islam began or took over the Middle East*. There was only Christianity, albeit Christianity with slightly different rituals depending on the area. The schism which created orthodoxy dates to the Middle Ages and mainly concerned whether the Bishop of Rome was one among equals with the Patriarchs of the eastern rite churches or the PRIMATE or first among them. There was also a theological dispute described by Yetos in his thread, which would have no effect on anyone's behavior or attitudes. It's like the medieval arguments about how many angels can fit on the head of a pin.

If you're a believing Muslim you believe the Koran is the inspired word of God. If you're not you probably believe the scholars who say Mohammed picked up bits and pieces of the basic beliefs of Jews and Christians and incorporated them into his new religion. *There is nothing in the statements about Jesus and Mary in the Koran which are at all specific to Orthodox versus Roman Catholicism.* I'd tell you to prove otherwise but you can't, which is why you haven't posted any proof for any of your other ridiculous claims.

----------


## Yetos

> Its not only the fact that they live side by side what makes them similar. Its the fact that Islam is a much younger religion than Christianity. Its about 700 years younger I think. People who become Muslims belonged to Orthodox Christianity before they made the transition to Islam. So many Orthodox teachings were adopted to Islam. Is it a coincidence that Islam also accepts that very first people who appeared on earth were Eva and Adam? So that is why there is a striking similarity among both religions Islam and Orthodoxy. The only difference is that Christ speaks for Orthodoxy and Mohamed for Islam, but they say almost the same thing even though they lived different lives. Largely Islam was born out of Orthodox teachings with minor differences.




DUpidh

*That is the second Stupist thing I read in this Forum
and the first is also by you in this Thread,


So how Come Muslims come from Orthodox Christians at 600-800 AD
when the schism started at 870 Ad with 'Photios schism' and completed at 1054 with the anathemas 
maybe at your Maths 600 is bigger than 900 
but in mine, NOT


the most stupid think I heard,
Orthodox and Catholics existed before 911 AD

Just ignorance and stupidity

For your information

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photian_schism 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East%E2%80%93West_Schism


as for your information 
at 1054 the division Orthodox Catholic is this




Now tell us how come Ortodox connected with Islam there 
since the area is already under Islamic domination

Beside if you know the story of Hadji Bektas (Bektashi) and Alovites Turks 
then surely reecosinder what you talk about

*The Supremacy of Papa*

the supremacy of Papa starts from the times of Onoria and the decline of the West Roman empire,
The emperrors of the West exit very weak after Huns and Goths,
so someone should replace the emperor,
*the only one who could claim power since the emperror is not strong is a religious archon ,
*That is why Papa is the only Patriarch that has state and guard,
and since no emperror in the West,
Papa turn to East many times, in order to ask help for Rome,
and there starts the race for supremacy, who should be more protected, or which patriarch the will is stronger to the emperror
1 in jerusalem
1 in Asia
1 in Africa
1 in the Roman empire (Europe)
meaning who Patriarch must be considered as first priority by emperror,

this ended By the creation of Carlomagneian state 
which I believe was designed and programmed so to create stability and a normal status at West.

but later East Roman had problem with Bulgarians 
*and the emperror choose Patriarch without asking Papa*
so that was a direct hit on Papa supremacy,
it is called the Photios Schism by Western scholars


something similar Hapened at East Roman but under different circumstances
After the fall of Con/polis, Mohamet knew that he should find a new leader for the Byzantines,
so he gave priviledges to Patriarch of Con\polis
and the last work as the leader of the of Γενος (nation) 
the head of Rums the time of Ottomans was the Patriarch due to the authorities and priviledges given by Mohamet
infact that is considered the smartest move that Mohamet did, even smarter than the conquest of Con\polis
*he created a political supreme leader frm the classs of religion, that he will be always a kind of prisoner, 
*that is why patriarchate of Con/polis gave so many expels to rebels against Ottoman rule,
who would follow an expeled one, all want to follow the blessed one

----------


## DuPidh

> Can you please pick up a book on these subjects so that you don't make these kinds of egregious errors? 
> 
> *There was no Orthodox Christianity when Islam began or took over the Middle East*. There was only Christianity, albeit Christianity with slightly different rituals depending on the area. The schism which created orthodoxy dates to the Middle Ages and mainly concerned whether the Bishop of Rome was one among equals with the Patriarchs of the eastern rite churches or the PRIMATE or first among them. There was also a theological dispute described by Yetos in his thread, which would have no effect on anyone's behavior or attitudes. It's like the medieval arguments about how many angels can fit on the head of a pin.
> 
> If you're a believing Muslim you believe the Koran is the inspired word of God. If you're not you probably believe the scholars who say Mohammed picked up bits and pieces of the basic beliefs of Jews and Christians and incorporated them into his new religion. *There is nothing in the statements about Jesus and Mary in the Koran which are at all specific to Orthodox versus Roman Catholicism.* I'd tell you to prove otherwise but you can't, which is why you haven't posted any proof for any of your other ridiculous claims.


I have not read the Koran but I have seen theological debates on You tube. Islamic's admit the Existence of Jesus and Mary, but they disagree if he was the son of God, or a earthly thing like all of us, who God chose to communicate his teachings. That's why Islamic's insist: There is no God but Allah. Which means Jesus was a prophet.
I disagree with you when you say there was not Orthodox Christianity when Islam took over. Orthodox Christianity is the same like Christianity of East. Are YOU SAYING THERE WAS NOT Christianity IN THE East?.Christianity unified to a certain degree after the invention of printing machines. Before it has had numerous sects. Even today is not unified Christianity. Not all Christians agree that Jesus was born on Christmas day. I am not saying that rites of Orthodoxy and Islam are similar, but the ideology is strikingly similar. I may sound provocative but that how many scholars of theology think that Orthodoxy and Islam share large part of ideology, for the reasons I posted in previous parts. If curious you may discus the matter with impartial scholars of theology, and see what they have to say.

----------


## DuPidh

> You have failed to produce links to statements by theologians which support your view. Now you claim that scholars support your view. Please provide the appropriate links, or admit that they don't exist and your statement was incorrect.
> 
> As for the remainder of your post it's absolutely false. Are you aware that a good number of the churches in the East are in fact in communion with the Roman church and merely maintain a different liturgy?
> 
> Where you have gotten the absurd idea that Eastern Christian women follow Muslim codes in dress other than out of fear of harassment and worse I have no idea.


https://www.debate.org/debates/Ortho...n-many-ways/1/

----------


## Angela

> I have not read the Koran but I have seen theological debates on You tube. Islamic's admit the Existence of Jesus and Mary, but they disagree if he was the son of God, or a earthly thing like all of us, who God chose to communicate his teachings. That's why Islamic's insist: There is no God but Allah. Which means Jesus was a prophet.
> I disagree with you when you say there was not Orthodox Christianity when Islam took over. Orthodox Christianity is the same like Christianity of East. Are YOU SAYING THERE WAS NOT Christianity IN THE East?.Christianity unified to a certain degree after the invention of printing machines. Before it has had numerous sects. Even today is not unified Christianity. Not all Christians agree that Jesus was born on Christmas day. *I am not saying that rites of Orthodoxy and Islam are similar, but the ideology is strikingly similar. I may sound provocative but that how many scholars of theology think that Orthodoxy and Islam share large part of ideology, for the reasons I posted in previous parts. If curious you may discus the matter with impartial scholars of theology, and see what they have to say.*


First: never take what some random people on youtube say as gospel.

Second: I'll say this as simply as possible once more and then that's it. THERE WERE NO* ORTHODOX* CATHOLICS IN THE NEAR EAST at the time of the Muslim conquest, just as there were none in eastern Europe. ALL CHRISTIANS EVERYWHERE AT THAT TIME BELIEVED BASICALLY THE SAME THINGS in terms of doctrine and theology, except for minor differences. THE MAJOR DIFFERENCES WERE LITURGICAL. THE SCHISM TOOK PLACE LATER. 

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East%E2%80%93West_Schism

The major theological difference was over this clause in the Nicene Creed. The eastern Catholics wanted it to say only from the Father. That's it. It has to do with the Holy Spirit and has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with Islam.

"I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,who proceeds from the Father *⟨and the Son⟩*.Who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified."

The other major difference had to do with the supremacy of the Pope, and there were other disputes over whether unleavened bread should be used at communion, and canonical differences having to do with the celibacy of regular parish priests. Monks in the eastern churches are, of course, supposed to be celibate. Of course, the language used in the liturgy was different.

Again, absolutely nothing to do with Islamic doctrine or dogma. You have repeatedly been asked to link to articles by actual theologians or church historians. You haven't done so, and I can tell you why. They don't exist. Take it from someone who was force fed theology for forty-five minutes a day every school day for more than four years, and then took some theology courses later in life as well. There are consequences here for posting misinformation or refusing to provide documentation for absurd claims. This is your last warning.

The one link which you provided is to a site which is so loaded with malware or other malicious software that my system won't let me access it. That should tell people everything they need to know. Infractions can also be given for that. Don't do it again.

----------


## Boreas

> Latin hasn't been used in Roman Catholic liturgy or prayer for decades, not since Vatican II.


Thank you for update,

After the WW2 - rising leftist less religious people in Europe, there aren't left to much thing left in Catholicism. Where are those good Latinized Christians?  :Grin: 

They have stayed in back, for reform. Now they are tring to do as Vatican 2 (1962) - Thanks again  :Heart: 

Similarly, the babies who died before baptist ceremony were wenting to Hell, but now, they are not. I remember, Pope statement when he was in Africa.




> As for your second bolded comment, whatever those people claim they are, whatever they were born or raised, they're not Christians, and I include in that members of Unitarian churches. It's like saying you don't believe Mohammed is the Prophet, but you're still a Muslim.
> 
> To be a Christian one has to believe in some version of the Nicene Creed. It's part of Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Protestantism etc.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed




That is too puritan idea and Mohammed example is not proper, I mean comparing about totally not believing and seeing as a just a prophet. 

But I see your point which is classical view.

----------


## Yetos

@ Dupidh

For your information
the etymology of the word Papa is from the Greek Eatern pronouncation of the Aramaic Αββα Abba = Father

so the modern word that orthodox use for dad is babba from Aramaic Antiocheian christian Abba
the word that orthodox use for a priest as father of community is παππά pappά
the change of tone give emphasis to the word as ULTIMATE FATHER (of faith).
and was used not only at Rome but also at Alexandreia 
*Even islam uses the same word as Abu* 

even the word Catholic etymology is from Greek Καθ'ολικον =to all 

*the things you should read first are the historical facts that all churches, scholars etc do not deny
and then the fantastic conspiracy

and I suggest to read this first about the Ecuminical congresses and counsils of THE ONE HOLY CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC church

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecumenical_council

and the heresies of the ecumenical counsil (global) 

the ones you read are confusing you in Purpose.

scholars say this:
ISLAM FOUND EASY WAY TO EXPAND AT THE LANDS OF MONOPHYSITES AND OTHER HERETIC 
the ones who were expelled by Global councils 

Scholars do not say :
ISLAM FOUND EASY WAY TO EXPAND AT THE LANDS OF ORTHODOX 
WHO WAS CREATED 3 CENTURIES AFTER. IT IS ATOPON even to the most conspiracy theory

*

----------


## KarenJed

I re-read Platos Republic last year, the first time I read it was a very long time ago in a Galaxy far away. I didnt think his work so amazing back than but I do today, I want to thank Joe Quinn for pushing me to read it again and you Janus for this thread.

----------


## Joey37

No, and I think that if Rome had been more like the Orthodox, there wouldn't have been a Protestant schism; sure, there were the devout like the Lollards and Anabaptists who were earnest evangelicals, but as you can see Protestantism is primarily a Germanic development. If the Germanics had been allowed their independent churches (like with the Orthodox; they have Serbian Orthodox, Romanian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, each people with a discrete church) the Reformation would probably have been just a folk movement, like Pietism in the Lutheran world, or Puritanism in English Protestantism.

----------


## Angela

I sincerely doubt that.

It very much depends on the type of Protestantism. 

Episcopalians and Lutherans are one thing, but sects like the Presbyterians, the Methodists, the Baptists, and the Quakers are a completely different kettle of fish, and, btw, they're not "Germanic" sects, unless you consider Calvin Germanic. 

There could never have been "communion" between them and Roman Catholics.

The doctrinal or theological differences are huge. So huge, that to get away from Anglicanism they went to the New World so they could impose their own "brand" of Christianity, outlawing all other forms, including the Anglicanism of their home country,

There are no doctrinal differences between Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics. It all started over politics: who should be THE PRIMATE, the Bishop of Rome or Constantinople. The rite is different, of course, but it's very similar to the rites of the Eastern Catholic Churches who are indeed in communion with Roman Catholics.

Even decades ago when I was in high school I was told that if I couldn't find a Catholic Church on Sunday, to go to an Orthodox one. There are now splinter Anglican ones which have already unified.

----------


## Farstar

> I sincerely doubt that.
> 
> It very much depends on the type of Protestantism. 
> 
> Episcopalians and Lutherans are one thing, but sects like the Presbyterians, the Methodists, the Baptists, and the Quakers are a completely different kettle of fish, and, btw, they're not "Germanic" sects, unless you consider Calvin Germanic. 
> 
> There could never have been "communion" between them and Roman Catholics.
> 
> The doctrinal or theological differences are huge. So huge, that to get away from Anglicanism they went to the New World so they could impose their own "brand" of Christianity, outlawing all other forms, including the Anglicanism of their home country,
> ...


Yes, the relationship between Catholicism and Orthodoxy is now very fluid. As you say, Greek Catholic churches are a bridge between both, and a natural one at so. The only discussion is the Russian Orthodox Church, which tries to make life difficult for this relationship. In my family, we have a combination of Catholics and Orthodox, and we have practical experience on that.

----------


## blevins13

It took a thousands year (in 1965) for Pope Paul VI and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Athenagoras I to nullify the anathemas of 1054. It will take another 1000 years for the unification.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## blevins13

> I agree with you. To a large extent the history of Europe is the history of Christianity. As you say, in a pluralistic society such as that of the U.S. it shouldn't be about indoctrination into dogma; it should be about teaching the history of western civilization, and you can't teach that without teaching the history of Christianity. You also can't teach the history of the Near East without teaching about it, as well as about Islam. 
> 
> Unfortunately, from what I can tell history is less and less a part of the curriculum. It's much more about teaching "pluralism". What's the point of teaching pluralism if you understand nothing of the past of any of these groups of people. It's just absurd. 
> 
> American television does a lot of "on the street" interviews with people not about ancient of medieval history, but about American history. It's only about a 300 year period, for goodness' sakes, and the level of ignorance is astounding. I literally can't watch these segments. I don't find it at all funny; it's sad.


History of the Europe in the last 3000 years is mostly the history of Roman Empire, it impact was huge and still is. Christianity was a revolution that later turn into a religion used mostly for political power by controlling people. At the moment the faith was used for political power at this moment they had nothing to do with Christ(the revolutionary) and more to do with Constantin(the emperor).


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Angela

> Yes, the relationship between Catholicism and Orthodoxy is now very fluid. As you say, Greek Catholic churches are a bridge between both, and a natural one at so. The only discussion is the Russian Orthodox Church, which tries to make life difficult for this relationship. In my family, we have a combination of Catholics and Orthodox, and we have practical experience on that.


Exactly so. 

The leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church is what stands in the way, and given that now as always it is more controlled by the state than the Roman Church ever was, it doesn't seem that formal unification will happen anytime soon, despite the fact that the Roman Church would do it expeditiously.

There is, as I said, but as most people don't realize because the rite is so different, no insurmountable theological difference between Orthodox and Roman Catholic Christianity. Every theologian who taught me, and that was for 45 minutes a day, five days a week, for four years of secondary school, said that Roman Catholics could perfectly properly not only attend Orthodox services, but accept communion at those services, because their priests are within the apostolic succession, and their celebration of the mass is a true sacrament. 

The rest is just politics.

@Blevin,

I recommend to you Tom Holland's "DOMINION: How Christianity Remade the World"
https://books.google.com/books/about...d=CWyGDwAAQBAJ

----------


## bigsnake49

@Angela, there is a minute theological difference between Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic adherents, the filoque. It come down to whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (Orthodox) or the Father and the Son (Catholics). It is a completely esoteric and for me useless sophism. The most substantial differences are the papal primacy (for Orthodox he's the first among equals) and the papal infallibility doctrine.

----------


## Angela

> @Angela, there is a minute theological difference between Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic adherents, the filoque. It come down to whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (Orthodox) or the Father and the Son (Catholics). It is a completely esoteric and for me useless sophism. The most substantial differences are the papal primacy (for Orthodox he's the first among equals) and the papal infallibility doctrine.


Yes, I know, but all the recent popes have seemed very willing to enter into dialogue on those points. There doesn't seem to be any equal willingness on the other side. 

Coincidentally, I went to an eastern rite service (church in communion with Rome) this week end. I found it very beautiful, more beautiful than what the liturgy has become in Roman Catholicism.

----------


## bigsnake49

> Yes, I know, but all the recent popes have seemed very willing to enter into dialogue on those points. There doesn't seem to be any equal willingness on the other side. 
> 
> Coincidentally, I went to an eastern rite service (church in communion with Rome) this week end. I found it very beautiful, more beautiful than what the liturgy has become in Roman Catholicism.


It can be with a very good cantor or chorus. Unfortunately where I grew up we had neither and the priest was old, did not have a good voice and hurried through the liturgy.

----------


## ΠΑΝΑΞ

> It can be with a very good cantor or chorus. Unfortunately where I grew up we had neither and the priest was old, did not have a good voice and hurried through the liturgy.


 :Laughing: 
Hi @bigsnake.
I had experianced that.... at a very remote place far from Athens with less of dozen villagers, (Pindus)
The priest and the chanter very old, and the psalms full in discordance (false tone, paraphony, cacophony, etc)
About being hurried it wasn't the case, it was more than a couple and half hours. But the following is what surprised me and what surprized me
had to do with "me".

I am naturally believer-infidel case (for all that concerns about spiritual quests etc) and I work for many years in a "music house", (actually to the best and 
the biggest in Greece if not Balkans) anyway my point actually is that my ears are very sensitive, even in my personal relations the voice of a person is very essential characteristic for me. That is about me and the sound, quite eclecticist and surelly not ecclesiastic. 

Before I study (Applied and visual arts) I work at summers, at a byzantine iconography workshop for pocket money. That was a great experiance because
the laboratory and the personnel had very medieval arrangements in hierachical order , (assistants, pupils, craftsmen, archicraftsmen etc).
Allthough affiliated with the "culture" I would never consider me as a "true believer", and maybe am wrong but more or less that goes -maybe, as well- for the rest of the people there.
To summarize it with few words, not only my ears are sensitive but as well I am mot so warm fun of liturgies...

But one sunday, up on the high peak of unresistable and inevitable boredome ... the Apocalypse.
Maybe the reason was that it was too early in the morning and weather snowy. Maybe the candles and the fumes of the incenses...
Dont know. 
Everything sound so perfect... It was the same false tones, the same priest , the same old men chanters, everything was the same.
Only I was different at that moment. Harmony is what I recall.
Harmony is not a word in a book, it is not even all the words in one book. For me Harmony -now- is all the books in a single word.
And that word is Agape (love).., and I simply just flourished of it... Sundelly.


I finished my metaphysical experiance with grand mama's sunday meal with lamb chops, spinach pie and "tsalafuti" (saracatsan sour youghurt)
Retsina wine and good smokes with grand-pa.

Amen...

----------


## ΠΑΝΑΞ

The relation of Orthodoxy and Catholicism, it is the relation of a mother with her daughter.
-Unification?
Well if the daughter wish .., how the mother will ignore her beloved child.


He-hehe (I'm ready for negotiations...)

----------


## ΠΑΝΑΞ

The relation of orthodox and Islam, if anything is obvious- except theological issues and matters- is might be partially and ralatively commonized with 
the Music. The Eastern Music is more peculliar and more rich in some "colour" elements. (climaxes, routes, "ways")) instead the Western Do-Majore, La 
minore scales, etc. Which is more "simple" (nothing is simple), clear lets say. I personally Instead prefer the Epirotan and blues pentatonic (more simple) for 
the example. That nothing have to the quality of Music anyway. But the kind of the"architect" standards which every music builted in time.

So, the oriental "colours" in the religious chants is mostly what commons them . ( Islam and Orthodoxy,)
That colours were present before christianity even before iron Ages.
The pentatonic very deep older. Maybe long after we left the "tree", but close enough to the days we left he "cave". (melodies like lullabies kind of thing)
The Greek song is monophonic instead of the polyphonic rest of Balkans ,amazing all by the way
(How did I forget the Gregoriano rhythm which iam not affiliated but always mesmerized when I listen.)


The greek orthodox scenery has alot of common routes with Egypt and Syrolevantine and Anatolian influences, (of course and India at some extend through 
them) but also have a brave chunk of the known antigue rituals as mysteries.
There is no organs, probably imitate customs similar of Jews (only human voice, more "direct"). I have the feeling that string instrumens is more
"Appolonian" cosmopolitan, bright and enlight in that sense, and the pneumatic instrumens (pipes, flutes), more Dionysian, dark, mystery and ecstatic, usually
accompanied with the local kind drum. An example: zampognas and tambourine at Tarrantela's, at south Italy and tsambouna and tumba or tumbaki at 
Aegean islands and many others (zournas & defi, etc). 

When I was kid it was moments I was afraid the priests with all that sounds, the smokes, the jingles, the spells... Quite creepy and scary.
The greeks "enjoy" big drama's and theatrale perfomance, in a way similar of the italians enjoy Opera. 
They are some things, that some guys do/did them better.
Nothing to question about that.

(some music)
One theme, with two different versions from the same composer.
Indicative of the cosmopolitan music and not stricktly ecclesiastic, but the melos are following the orienal ways of that time
With Byzantine lyre (1:05)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99N7iIqcZus 
With Kanon-aki (1:44)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WC7eKeDEjk 


That;s how we do it Anthropology and Theology in three posts.
LoL guys.  :Smile:

----------


## ΠΑΝΑΞ

Oh, damn it, I burned my food...for that posts

----------


## ΠΑΝΑΞ

what to eat now "Manna" from the sky...

@bigsnake are there any apples left? (from the tree, you know...)
you devil...

----------


## bigsnake49

> what to eat now "Manna" from the sky...
> 
> @bigsnake are there any apples left? (from the tree, you know...)
> you devil...


Panax, as a fellow Greek you know better than that. Apples are out of season, maybe some early peaches. Early karpouzia (watermelons) with feta cheese and some freshly baked bread under the clemataria (overhead grapevine) or bougainvillea.
bougainv.Monemv.jpg

----------


## bigsnake49

> The relation of orthodox and Islam, if anything is obvious- except theological issues and matters- is might be partially and ralatively commonized with 
> the Music. The Eastern Music is more peculliar and more rich in some "colour" elements. (climaxes, routes, "ways")) instead the Western Do-Majore, La 
> minore scales, etc. Which is more "simple" (nothing is simple), clear lets say. I personally Instead prefer the Epirotan and blues pentatonic (more simple) for 
> the example. That nothing have to the quality of Music anyway. But the kind of the"architect" standards which every music builted in time.
> 
> So, the oriental "colours" in the religious chants is mostly what commons them . ( Islam and Orthodoxy,)
> That colours were present before christianity even before iron Ages.
> The pentatonic very deep older. Maybe long after we left the "tree", but close enough to the days we left he "cave". (melodies like lullabies kind of thing)
> The Greek song is monophonic instead of the polyphonic rest of Balkans ,amazing all by the way
> ...


Having been to quite a few Jewish weddings, I can say that the cantor in a Greek church is the equivalent in tonality with the Jewish canting. I have not been in a mosque so I need some help here as to the Islamic chanting.
My experiences with going to the Greek church was that of an overcrowded church with too many lit candles sucking the oxygen out of the room and my own lungs to the point where I had to go outside to revive. Never mind the incessant droning on. We were forced to go to church every Sunday until the end of high school. For as much of an emphasis and a focus as the Orthodox church has been in the Balkans, Middle East, Armenia, Egypt you would think they would have some better hymns. They have had close to 2000 years, what are they waiting for?

----------


## ΠΑΝΑΞ

> Having been to quite a few Jewish weddings, I can say that the cantor in a Greek church is the equivalent in tonality with the Jewish canting. I have not been in a mosque so I need some help here as to the Islamic chanting.
> My experiences with going to the Greek church was that of an overcrowded church with too many lit candles sucking the oxygen out of the room and my own lungs to the point where I had to go outside to revive. Never mind the incessant droning on. We were forced to go to church every Sunday until the end of high school. *For as much of an emphasis and a focus as the Orthodox church has been in the Balkans, Middle East, Armenia, Egypt you would think they would have some better hymns. They have had close to 2000 years, what are they waiting for?*


Yes, I think now we are heading to the core issue. Well at the periphery of the question it is quite difficult firstly to have a safe definition for"better hymns"... 
What would be the quality standards for that? Actually at my previous post (sunday at church...) that was my sub-notion:
That at the end there is more than an superficial aesthetic enjoyment, but mostly hyperaesthetic mystic experiance.


Anyway, all the religions are "institutional" social schematisms and not available for occasional; or anything other changes. 
(which inevitably at the future will happen). That goes as well for the laws and our constitutions at some level, in our modern democracies.
The changes must be slow... If any of them must occur. Anything other is quite disturbance for the any "system".


You know I have the feeling that the christiam religions are Plato's "revenge". 
If the "Idea" is true, is not receptive for any change. In short words.
But the big question -for me -is: 
It is the church; religion; or dogmas; that must shape society and individuals; or the opposite?
The question is rhetorical of course.

----------


## G2ian

Regarding the question. Absolutely not, Georgian church almost had the president excommunicated for so much as inviting the Pope to Tbilisi. 

I just wish they'd both relax and stop forcing their dogma on people.

----------


## Yetos

> Panax, as a fellow Greek you know better than that. Apples are out of season, maybe some early peaches. Early karpouzia (watermelons) with feta cheese and some freshly baked bread under the clemataria (overhead grapevine) or bougainvillea.
> bougainv.Monemv.jpg



it is end of strawberries,
*full season of apricots, and cherries,*
start of early peaches and Amaliada watermelons, and early plums (next week is full season)









by the way, 
this the Ematheia valley, when peaches are on flower status.
*Pink valley*

----------


## Angela

The Tridentine Mass and other Latin rituals are still celebrated at designated churches; usually it's only one Mass out of the entire schedule however, and even in a place as populated as Long Island, there's only about four or five such churces. It's still beautiful, even if they don't have the benefit of a Bocelli singing. 

At about 7 min:30 in you can hear the Kyrie Eleison. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwlU3jeUkFw

----------


## bigsnake49

> The Tridentine Mass and other Latin rituals are still celebrated at designated churches; usually it's only one Mass out of the entire schedule however, and even in a place as populated as Long Island, there's only about four or five such churces. It's still beautiful, even if they don't have the benefit of a Bocelli singing. 
> 
> At about 7 min:30 in you can hear the Kyrie Eleison. :)
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwlU3jeUkFw


Magnificent mass and church! I wonder how it would sound in a small village church though.

----------


## Angela

> Magnificent mass and church! I wonder how it would sound in a small village church though.


The smallest village church in Italy is beautiful. My birth town has about 500 inhabitants in the walled village itself. There are some hundreds more outside the walls, but I wouldn't say it's more than 1500 people.

This is our church:




They don't seem to have put one of our masses up on youtube.

This is a neighboring, equally small village. They did video a Mass. Unfortunately, the angle means you can't see the whole altar.

----------


## bigsnake49

I like big cathedrals with large organs and large choirs because I like epic music. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOd1CufcMGQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PAc3krFyQA

----------


## Angela

Then New York, especially at Christmas, is for you. The sacred music performed at St. Barts, St. Thomas', St. John the Divine, as well, of course, at St. Patrick's, is stupendous.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TXqGoaSp-o


Sometimes, though, for me, the most transporting sacred music can be in a very intimate setting.




Also, another beautiful Corsican one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDZuPUA1vNE


If I lived in Toscana and could listen to the monks at Sant' Antimo all the time, maybe I would come back to the church.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GlaLNm3muI

----------


## bigsnake49

Is the scaffolding gone, Angela?

----------


## Angela

> Is the scaffolding gone, Angela?


The scaffolding is gone. The Cathedral was about to fall on everyone's heads, so they had to do a massive three years repair and restoration. One additional benefit is that now it's not freezing in winter, and they've cleaned the interior so that it looks as it was intended to originally.

It's faux Gothic, but still quite beautiful in its own way, I think.

----------


## Yetos

> The scaffolding is gone. The Cathedral was about to fall on everyone's heads, so they had to do a massive three years repair and restoration. One additional benefit is that now it's not freezing in winter, and they've cleaned the interior so that it looks as it was intended to originally.
> 
> It's faux Gothic, but still quite beautiful in its own way, I think.



Gothic rythm of architecture was always 'odd-strange' to my horizon positioning system when I am inside,
I always feel strange in a Gothic rythm temple, 
I feel like I am in the forest, sourounded by big tall trees.
and beside me, behind the 'trees' are things hidden
I must admit though, that if the vertical elements are decorated and painted well.
these temples can be marvellous,
it is a style that always creates impressions, very bright, and plays strange games of light illusions,
tottaly different from the game of hide and seek, that light plays in a typical Roman court, a Basilica with thick brick walls.

----------


## Yetos

Lost in time






for West Europeans these are sounds unknown
since no Do - Re - Mi- Fa

and total different semitones, while must be 2 times harmonic

http://stsconstantinehelen.org/asset..._alignment.pdf

----------

