Replies

First, let my say from the start that I never meant to imply that our theologies are alike. I thought there was an amusing similarity, superficially, between the three stages mentioned. We do share some similarities and many more differences. For the sake of clarity, I will enumerate the latter without explanation:

The Eastern Orthodox and Calvinists share

The Holy Trinity
Two natures of Christ
Resurrection
Early Christian Creeds (although you subscribe with the rest of the Western Christians to the heretic Filioque clause inserted into the Nicene Creed by the Catholic Church)

Unfortunately, this is where our similarities end. We differ basically on things Eastern Orthodoxy differs with or rejects because they were never part of the original Church teaching. Specifically:

Calvinist Bondage of the Will
Protestant Doctrines of Grace
Doctrine of Justification by Grace alone through Faith
Regeneration and Sanctification, as defined
Predestination, as defined
Imputed or inherited guilt
Synergism
Sola Scriptura

Cyril Lukarias’s confession is more than anomaly. It is heresy. He confesses salvation through faith alone, a Protestant view. This is a perfect example why a church should not be run by one man. He didn’t rule Constantinople (Ecumenical Patriarch is an honorary title). The Synod guides the Church. In 1923 the Patriarch of Constantinople tried to get the Orthodox clergy to shave their beards and wear Western-like vestments. The only thing he managed to change was the calendar -- in some churches. The current one was buddy-buddy with the pope but luckily the Holy Synod resisted the temptation of one weak link. A living proof that papacy is not the way to go, and that Ecumenical Patriarchs don't rule in the Western juridical sense.

Trying to explain Orthodox sacrament of baptism, even if I had the time, space and expertise to do so, is best served by directing you to numerous Orthodox sites such as this one. Suffice it to say that there is no difference between the baptisms of a child and an adult. In Orthodoxy, baptism is regeneration. One cannot be saved without baptism.

The only difference between an adult and an infant is that the infant’s sponsors, in addition to being the witnesses, also recite the necessary words of rejecting and cursing Satan, and all the words the adults would have to say during baptism. The sponsors are under obligation to raise the child as his God parents in proper faith. The baptized person is also confirmed with oil, changed into clean clothes and immediately receives the Holy Eucharist.

Some adults who are not baptized at birth must express the desire to be baptized, which implies their awareness of God more than faith. In His love for mankind, God makes the first step of knocking on someone’s door so to say, and once aware of this the adult either makes the second step or doesn’t. Unlike Calvinsists, we believe that God wants to save as many of us as possible. We believe that God never rejected us but rather that mankind rejected God.

A person who is to become baptized is asked to read about the faith so that he or she knows what this is all about. EO do not baptize in order to believe. They baptize in order to make it possible to be saved. Our doctrines of Grace are different. Our version was acceptable to Church Fathers. We trust in their wisdom and teachings. If you really want an in depth theological basis for Orthodox teachings, I recommend St. John of Damascus, the 8th century writer.

With whom do the Eastern Orthodox agree?

With Jesus Christ, of course. :-)

As for similarities, I think your bondage of the will of man is closest to Hassidic Jews and Muslims, as it represents complete submission of our wickedness to God‘s will.We Orthodox, on the other hand, believe that human nature is defeated not by His will but by His love.

To call this a “theological dissimilarity” is an understatement. That doesn’t mean I can’t admire Calvinist devotion to God.

although you subscribe with the rest of the Western Christians to the heretic Filioque clause inserted into the Nicene Creed by the Catholic Church

Ahem... thou dost presume too much ;-).

This particular Calvinist does not subscribe to the filioque as it is generally rendered in English, "From the Father and the Son", being very uncomfortable with that Formula (I'm uncomfortable with that Formula, because I can't find it in the Bible. Sola Scriptura, et cetera).

Instead, I subscribe to the rendering of the Formula as "From the Father through the Son", a rendering which - unless I am mistaken - has been accepted by pretty much all Eastern Orthodox authorities everywhere as a permissible understanding (and well they should accept it, such rendering of the Formula being entirely Biblical).

Just a nit-pick on my part (grin). I'll address the rest of your post as I am able.

best, OP

We Orthodox, on the other hand, believe that human nature is defeated not by His will but by His love. To call this a “theological dissimilarity” is an understatement. That doesn’t mean I can’t admire Calvinist devotion to God. ~~ 110 posted on 02/29/2004 3:58:03 AM PST by kosta50

Worth repeating. So lovely and true. 118 posted on 02/29/2004 7:17:29 AM PST by MarMema

I must go you one further, Kosta. God never purposes to "defeat" Human Nature, whether by Will or by Love. God is not seeking the DEFEAT of the Imago Dei ~~ but rather our DEIFICATION.

God purposes to redeem Human Nature. Because Human Nature is Fallen.
"But He loved us, BEFORE we first loved Him."

That's the key point, to the Calvinist.

Do we acknowledge that Fallen Man is, in fact, Spiritually Dead?
Do we acknowledge that when God commissioned the Fall Curse in Eden, that Adam and Eve would Spiritually Die that very day -- do we admit that God was not lying?

If God was not lying, then the Race of Man is become, by nature, Spiritually Dead.

And those who are Spiritually Dead... must be Regenerated in order to Believe.
"He loved us, BEFORE we first loved Him."