# Humanities & Anthropology > Philosophy >  Which are the main differences among catholicoi and orthodoxoi

## Yetos

*WHICH ARE THE MAIN DIFFERENCES AMONG CATHOLICOI AND ORTHODOXOI.*


Around 900 AD the great schism happened, and finished with anathemas a century after,

Around 1440 an effort to unite happened at Ferrara Florentia congress

which is main difference of faith that does not allow this unification?

and it is not Orthodox make cross from right to left and Catholics from left to right,
or Orthodox use icon and paintings and Catholics use statues 
etc etc etc 

*the main supreme theoritical difference is 'et filio' or 'Filogue' 

*all the rest are just political games or proud or 'I am the one' egoism


the difference is that 

*και εις το Πνευμα το Αγιον το Κυριον το Ζωοποιον
το εκ του Πατρος εκπορευομενον (only Father)
*
and this 

_Et in Spiritum Sanctum Dominum Vivificantem
qui ex Patre et Filio (Filiogue) procedit (Father and son)
_
Now I do not want to open theological discuss,
on who is right and who is wrong,
It is Stupid to open here a subject that for 1 millenium and more is not solved
even by the specialists of these 2 churches

But that is the difference of faith among 2 churches.
the rest are just way of expression, liturgy etc etc
and offcourse as always supremacy!!! (egoism)
decoration blah blah blah

PS 
My Latin are terrible so plz correct me but show some anex

----------


## MarkoZ

When dealing with pre-secular institutions it is rather inaccurate to dismiss seemingly political differences as mere power struggle, as these things were interwoven at the time of separation. The glaring difference lies in the interpretation of Matthew 16:17-20 & Matthew 18:17-19, with the Orthodox stance being the equality of the apostles while Catholics stress the primacy of Peter. To cite an example from history, the denial of Petrine primacy and the Roman claim to succession has prompted Western reactionaries like De Maistre to polemically liken Orthodoxy to Protestantism. I don't endorse this view, but that's how many Western Catholics generally thought about this. Whether any of that remains relevant with Vatican II and the dwindling influence of both Churches is up for debate, of course.

----------


## LABERIA

> When dealing with pre-secular institutions it is rather inaccurate to dismiss seemingly political differences as mere power struggle, as these things were interwoven at the time of separation. The glaring difference lies in the interpretation of Matthew 16:17-20 & Matthew 18:17-19, with the Orthodox stance being the equality of the apostles while Catholics stress the primacy of Peter. To cite an example from history, the denial of Petrine primacy and the Roman claim to succession has prompted Western reactionaries like De Maistre to polemically liken Orthodoxy to Protestantism. I don't endorse this view, but that's how many Western Catholics generally thought about this. Whether any of that remains relevant with Vatican II and the dwindling influence of both Churches is up for debate, of course.


http://www.laparola.net/wiki.php?riferimento=Mt16%2C17-19%3BLc21%2C31-32%3BGv21%2C15-18&formato_rif=vp

*C.E.I.:**Matteo 16,17-19*

_17 E Gesù: «Beato te, Simone figlio di Giona, perché né la carne né il sangue te l'hanno rivelato, ma il Padre mio che sta nei cieli. 18 E io ti dico: Tu sei Pietro e su questa pietra edificherò la mia chiesa e le porte degli inferi non prevarranno contro di essa. 19 A te darò le chiavi del regno dei cieli, e tutto ciò che legherai sulla terra sarà legato nei cieli, e tutto ciò che scioglierai sulla terra sarà sciolto nei cieli».
_

Gg translator:
*C.E.I.:**Matthew 16.17 to 19*

_17 And Jesus: "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. "

_
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papa
_La particolare preminenza del papa sulla Chiesa cattolica deriva dall'essere considerato successore dell'apostolo Pietro, al quale, secondo l'interpretazione cattolica dei Vangeli, Cristo ha conferito l'incarico di pastore della Chiesa universale[4]. Pietro, secondo la tradizione, avrebbe retto negli ultimi anni di vita la comunità cristiana di Roma, divenendone il primo vescovo e subendovi il martirio nell'anno 67.

Gg translator:
_The special pre-eminence of the pope on the Catholic Church comes from being deemed the successor of the Apostle Peter, to whom, according to the Catholic interpretation of the Gospels, Christ conferred the position as a minister of the universal Church [4]. Peter, according to tradition, would hold up in the last years of life, the Christian community of Rome, becoming the first bishop and subendovi martyred in the year 67.

_Ambrose of Milan coined the famous expression "Ubi Petrus, ibi Ecclesia" (the Church exists only where the primacy of Peter is recognized, ie the pope).
_

----------


## Yetos

> http://www.laparola.net/wiki.php?riferimento=Mt16%2C17-19%3BLc21%2C31-32%3BGv21%2C15-18&formato_rif=vp
> 
> *C.E.I.:*
> 
> 
> *Matteo 16,17-19*
> 
> _17 E Gesù: «Beato te, Simone figlio di Giona, perché né la carne né il sangue te l'hanno rivelato, ma il Padre mio che sta nei cieli. 18 E io ti dico: Tu sei Pietro e su questa pietra edificherò la mia chiesa e le porte degli inferi non prevarranno contro di essa. 19 A te darò le chiavi del regno dei cieli, e tutto ciò che legherai sulla terra sarà legato nei cieli, e tutto ciò che scioglierai sulla terra sarà sciolto nei cieli».
> _
> ...



Oh really,

*I am not Christian, 
I ask not to discuss it here,
but the devil inside, could not resist right?

in fact that is what I hate on christians Muslims Hebrew, like radio they just transmit without even know what they transmitt
*Because someone 'of us' said something, Yeah we have to transmitted it, 
especially at some protestanting churches that is even annoying.

I return you the links and I say to You that *Patriarch of Jerusalem is also established by PETER and all eleven plus one apostoles

and this is not difference, among Catholic and Orthodox, it is just a Political subject, not a subject of Faith or Dogma or church

SIMPLY* the establishment of church did not happened at Rome, but at Jerusalem
the chapter you mention takes place at Πραξεις Αποστολων Α 15 Acts 1 15 

_Καὶ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ταύταις ἀναστὰς Πέτρος ἐν μέσῳ τῶν μαθητῶν εἶπεν· ἦν τε ὄχλος ὀνομάτων ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ὡς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν·_  

as you see Peter founded-established the one holy catholic apostolic church as the Jesus said at *Mathew 15 19* at Jerusalem with 120 people in the Upper room
they choose Matthias Ματθιας in the place of Juda 
and put first bishop Jacob the first patriarch of Jerusalem Patriarchy

@ LABERIA

I said I do not want to enter any Dogma discuss, but you challenge me


cause what is written at Mathew 15-19 took place at acts 1 15 

*THE ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH WAS ESTABLISHED BY PETER in The UPPER ROOM AT 33 AD AT JERUSALEM WITH PRESENCE 120 PEOPLE 
AND CHOOSE THE MISSING 12th Apostole WHO WOULD TAKE THE PLACE OF JUDA* 

The stablishment of Rome Patriarchate is not as you imagine it
Rome had Christians much before Peter arrive there and priests etc etc
*in fact Paul went there first* and easily could set a bishop, as in many places that Paul went especially Greece, to establish a patriarchate
*but Paul was not an apostole*, neither chosen as the twelve, etc etc
so at Rome the biggest capital of Europe, the central of empire the establishment should be an apostole,
and as you read here Ιωαννης κα 18 *John 21 18*

ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ὅτε ἦς νεώτερος, ἐζώννυες σεαυτὸν καὶ περιεπάτεις ὅπου ἤθελες· ὅταν δὲ γηράσῃς, ἐκτενεῖς τὰς χεῖράς σου, καὶ ἄλλος σε ζώσει, καὶ οἴσει ὅπου οὐ θέλεις.
τοῦτο δὲ εἶπε σημαίνων ποίῳ θανάτῳ δοξάσει τὸν Θεόν. καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν λέγει αὐτῷ· ἀκολούθει μοι._
_
CAUSE ALL APOSTOLES DIED AS MARTYRS EXCEPT JOHN the beloved one

20 Στράφηκε πίσω ο Πέτρος και βλέπει το μαθητή που αγαπούσε ο Ιησούς να ακολουθεί, ο οποίος και έπεσε, κατά το δείπνο πάνω στο στήθος του και είπε: «Κύριε, ποιος είναι αυτός που θα σε παραδώσει;» 
21 Αυτόν, λοιπόν, όταν τον είδε ο Πέτρος, λέει στον Ιησού: «Κύριε, και σ’ αυτόν τι θα συμβεί;» 
22 Του απαντά ο Ιησούς: «Αν θέλω αυτός να μένει ωσότου έρθω, τι σε νοιάζει; Εσύ ακολούθα με». 
23 Εξήλθε λοιπόν αυτή η φήμη στους αδελφούς, ότι εκείνος ο μαθητής δεν πεθαίνει. Δεν είπε όμως σ’ αυτόν ο Ιησούς ότι δεν πεθαίνει, αλλά: «Αν θέλω αυτός να μένει ωσότου έρθω, τι σε νοιάζει;» 
24 Αυτός είναι ο μαθητής που μαρτυρεί γι’ αυτά και τα έγραψε, και ξέρουμε ότι είναι αληθινή η μαρτυρία του. 

Peter went to Rome not to establish the church, cause he already done that decedes before at the upper room
But to Die as Martyr infront of a much bigger croud and seal the work that Paul did at Greco-Roman world 
He went there to seal John's written by his death and challenge the empire, he defies the empire.
so the first Bishop of Rome which evolute to Patriarch (Papa) see by his eyes the courage and the faith,
Peter went to Die and by his death seal the church, by placing a bishop at the heart of Empire
cause it said by Jesus at Mathew 16 19 

κἀγὼ δέ σοι λέγω ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος, καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς.

so the first act the foundation of Church happens at Jerusalem at upper room
the second act happens at Rome so to prove that gates of underworld Hades (not gates of hell) will not have power against (immortality of church)



PS
I wonder, all these guys outhere that like to play to play the good and faithfull christian and the wise one, and want to show me the light, but blind they are, 
haven't they read Paul 

Paul to Titos chapter 3 εδαφιον 9 

*ΜΩΡΑΣ ΔΕ ΦΙΛΟΝΕΙΚΙΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΓΕΝΕΑΛΟΓΙΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΕΡΙΔΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΜΑΧΑΣ ΝΟΜΙΚΑΣ ΦΕΥΓΕ ΔΙΟΤΙ ΕΙΝΑΙ ΑΝΩΦΕΛΕΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΜΑΤΑΙΑΙ 

*
PS2 
many times people have enlighments or claims etc etc, 
but I prefer to read the book first than whatever a scholar say, or just avoid it,
also many times I fall in the trap to trust scholars,
so the last comment and explanation you give about Ambrosios of Milan, Ι am certain that your explanation on his word is wrong
and since Ambrosios is not here, to explain his words, I just believe that the meaning and translation you give is wrong.
The answer with Jesus words through Mατθαιος ιη 15-20 *Mathew 18 15-20* 

Πάλιν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐὰν δύο ὑμῶν συμφωνήσωσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς περὶ παντὸς πράγματος οὗ ἐὰν αἰτήσωνται, γενήσεται αὐτοῖς παρὰ τοῦ πατρός μου τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς.
οὗ γάρ εἰσι δύο ἢ τρεῖς συνηγμένοι εἰς τὸ ἐμὸν ὄνομα, ἐκεῖ εἰμι ἐν μέσῳ αὐτῶν.

so what to do Peter when I can have Jesus? cause Peter work is done, according the christian God will, He founded church and won her immortality against my God Hades (Christianic teach)
and I wonder which is the head of church? Peter or Jesus?

*PS3 personal to you*
I do not know what your religion is, but if you were a true christian you should know these I wrote above
now if devil manage to enter your soul and could not resist to provoke me when I never said in this thread about supremacy and kindly ask not to expand cause milleniums now it is not solved
I will give a personal advice to you using Paul 

Paul to Corinthians first epistole chapter 3 (1rst Corinth 3 3-23) specially 10-11 and 20-21-22

Κατὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι ὡς σοφὸς ἀρχιτέκτων θεμέλιον τέθεικα, ἄλλος δὲ ἐποικοδομεῖ· ἕκαστος δὲ βλεπέτω πῶς ἐποικοδομεῖ·
_θεμέλιον γὰρ ἄλλον οὐδεὶς δύναται θεῖναι παρὰ τὸν κείμενον, ὅς ἐστιν Ἰησοῦς Χριστός._

καὶ πάλιν· Κύριος γινώσκει τοὺς διαλογισμοὺς τῶν σοφῶν, ὅτι εἰσὶ μάταιοι.
ὥστε μηδεὶς καυχάσθω ἐν ἀνθρώποις· πάντα γὰρ ὑμῶν ἐστιν,
εἴτε Παῦλος εἴτε Ἀπολλὼς εἴτε Κηφᾶς εἴτε κόσμος εἴτε ζωὴ εἴτε θάνατος εἴτε ἐνεστῶτα εἴτε μέλλοντα, πάντα ὑμῶν ἐστιν,

so either Paul either Apollos either Kefas etc etc either Peter, either Andrew, either Thomas .... 
if you want to be a christian find Jesus not the wiseguys neither the clerics.
and keep away from 'law' and 'dogma' fights and claims and genealogy etc etc cause wise guys become stupid. (σοφοι εμωρανθησαν)
it is political subject, not theological.

Το anyone who does not know Greek, I gave the places, find it in your own language



when I was kid every Friday Saturday night and Sunday morning my father used to read me the bible and then put me chapters to learn by heart just to feel comfort with ancient Greek texts
when I grew more he used Xenophon and Herodotos every night until the age of 12.
at the age of 16 he gave me as present Aristotle's 'Athenean constitution',
cause at 18 I had to vote, and until then I had to know what is democracy and how it should work.


To end.
Peter founded Both Jerusalem and Rome Patriarchates,
Can you tell me where Supremacy should be Given?
I feel more comfort and calm in the old religions, than in Abrahamic ones,

----------


## Yetos

> When dealing with pre-secular institutions it is rather inaccurate to dismiss seemingly political differences as mere power struggle, as these things were interwoven at the time of separation. The glaring difference lies in the interpretation of Matthew 16:17-20 & Matthew 18:17-19, with the Orthodox stance being the equality of the apostles while Catholics stress the primacy of Peter. To cite an example from history, the denial of Petrine primacy and the Roman claim to succession has prompted Western reactionaries like De Maistre to polemically liken Orthodoxy to Protestantism. I don't endorse this view, but that's how many Western Catholics generally thought about this. Whether any of that remains relevant with Vatican II and the dwindling influence of both Churches is up for debate, of course.




the first is a prophecy fullfiled at Acts 1 15
the second is the a mention to what power he gives to 12,
so all 12 have the same power to unlock or bind,
but only Peter will found the church.
and he gave also prophecy for his beloved John the theologist,
the writter of apocalypse.


Anyway 
*The supremacy or not of Papa is not a subject of faith.
*faith does not change by that, and believe me it would not affect the simple humble christian on a mountain village, or in a isolated island at the ends of the world.
who pays his humble contribution to church to be saved, rather the politicians and those who live by the church.
it is more *a political subject of order among clerics* and mainly at the third degree, the Bishop degree (Επισκοπος episcopos)
1 helper διακονος diaconus deacon
2 πρεσβυτερος presbyter senior
3 επισκοπος episcopus bishop

----------

