The Orthodox Church And The Lds Church

[Questing Beast]

• No guilt from original sin.
  

This is true. None of us inherited any guilt from the Fall. The Orthodox do not accept Augustine's formulation of original sin. Rather, we believe that the Fall corrupted our nature, depriving us of grace and giving every person an inclination to sin.

• No Calvinists.
  

Nope.

• No filioque/Looser oneness among members of the Trinity.
  

Correct, no filoque. I don't know that I agree that we believe in a 'looser oneness' of members of the Trinity. Like the Western Church, we believe, as it states in the Creed, "in the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of Light; true God of true God; begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father..." We believe in One God in three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. One divine essence, indivisible, incomprehensible, impassible.

• Temples.
  

We call our churches temples. The iconostasis reprepresents the veil and the altar is located behind the veil in the holy of holies, the place where heaven and earth meet. "On earth as it is in heaven". The angel priesthood serves at the altar and the priest serves in the person of our Great High Priest, Jesus.

• Subordinationism (sort of?)
  

We view all members of the Holy Trinity as equal in glory and power. The Father eternally begets, the Son is eternally begotten, and the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds. All are eternally God, sharing the one divine essence. There is only one God, not three. We Orthodox are not subordinationists.

• Some form of deification.
  

Yes. We call this theosis. Many LDS apologists quote our greek Orthodox church fathers to discuss deification and show it is an ancient teaching. It is; it was taught by Jesus to the Apostles, who transmitted it to their bishop successors, whose own bishop successors have preserved the true teaching about theosis within Holy Tradition. Theosis and the LDS teaching of exaltation bear many similarities, though we Orthdox do not believe we will be God, or be exactly like God. He is uncreated; we are created. We have human natures; God is divine and possesses a divine nature (essence). We will always be human, though deified. We will partake of the divine nature in Christ; the divine essence will permeate our very being, illuminating us and turning us into 'gods' (with a small 'g'). But we will still have a human nature, not a divine nature. We will partake of that nature, not have that nature for ourselves. There is only one God, one infinite, divine essence. This is theosis in the Orthodox Church

I hope that helps..

That's good stuff. I agree with all of it, the way you express it here....

[mfbukowski]

We call our churches temples. The iconostasis reprepresents the veil and the altar is located behind the veil in the holy of holies, the place where heaven and earth meet. "On earth as it is in heaven". The angel priesthood serves at the altar and the priest serves in the person of our Great High Priest, Jesus.

There's a lot here I wish I could say. There are great similarities here with our temple worship.

[Spammer]

There's a lot here I wish I could say. There are great similarities here with our temple worship.

Indeed. Those of us (like you) who have lived and worshiped within both traditions see this very clearly.

[teddyaware]

One year ago this month, I attended compelling lecture by Margaret Barker, hosted by the Orthodox Church in America's Saint Vladimir's Seminary in Yonkers, New York. Dr. Barker and I had become aware of each other through mutual friends in England, so I approached and introduced myself to her, just prior to the commencement lecture, so she could put a face to my name. In attendence was one Metropolitan Jonah, highest leader of the Orthodox Church in America.

After the lecture, Professor Barker mentioned to Metropolitan Jonah I was LDS. Upon learning of my religious affiliation, the Metropolitan approached me and made my acquaintance. After some friendly small talk, I was astonished and thrilled when he informed me he wanted "to open up a dialogue with the Latter-day Saints." Thereafter, I contacted a couple well-known members of the LDS academic community to inform them of Metropolitan Jonah's desires, but I don't know if either of the two followed through.

So to all on this board who are in a position to make something happen -- be it known that the highest prelate of the Orthodox Church in America told me, in the presence of witnesses, that he would like to open up a dialogue with the Latter-day Saints...

Edited January 21, 2013 by teddyaware

[Spammer]

The OCA, Greek Orthodox, Antiochian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, and other slavic Orthodox churches are all in communion (all are Eastern Orthodox) but have different metropolitans. I attend an OCA parish. We have a new metropolitan, Metropolitan Tikhon, who replaced Metropolitan Jonah a few months ago. Hopefully the two leaders discussed this desired initiative before Metropolitan Jonah stepped down and it will bear fruit. Building on the endeavor beyond the OCA will require Metropolitan Tikhon to share it with the other metropolitans. The largest of the Orthodox churches is the Russian, both Russian Orthodox in Russia and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR). If Metropolitan Hilarion (head of the entire Russian church) is not on board, the majority of Eastern Orthodox worldwide will not be on board (which is not to say that individual Orthodox in any of the churches might not wish for such an interaction between our churches to occur).

Edited January 21, 2013 by Spammer

[teddyaware]

The OCA, Greek Orthodox, Antiochian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, and other slavic Orthodox churches are all in communion (all are Eastern Orthodox) but have different metropolitans. I attend an OCA parish. We have a new metropolitan, Metropolitan Tikhon, who replaced Metropolitan Jonah a few months ago. Hopefully the two leaders discussed this desired initiative before Metropolitan Jonah stepped down and it will bear fruit. Building on the endeavor beyond the OCA will require Metropolitan Tikhon to share it with the other metropolitans. The largest of the Orthodox churches is the Russian, both Russian Orthodox in Russia and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR). If Metropolitan Hilarion (head of the entire Russian church) is not on board, the majority of Eastern Orthodox worldwide will not be on board (which is not to say that individual Orthodox in any of the churches might not wish for such an interaction between our churches to occur).

Thanks for the update. It would seem likely that former Metropolitan Jonah would still be the most likely first person to contact in pursuit of his suggested OCA/LDS dialogue. Yes?

[mfbukowski]

One year ago this month, I attended compelling lecture by Margaret Barker, hosted by the Orthodox Church in America's Saint Vladimir's Seminary in Yonkers, New York. Dr. Barker and I had become aware of each other through mutual friends in England, so I approached and introduced myself to her, just prior to the commencement lecture, so she could put a face to my name. In attendence was one Metropolitan Jonah, highest leader of the Orthodox Church in America.

After the lecture, Professor Barker mentioned to Metropolitan Jonah I was LDS. Upon learning of my religious affiliation, the Metropolitan approached me and made my acquaintance. After some friendly small talk, I was astonished and thrilled when he informed me he wanted "to open up a dialogue with the Latter-day Saints." Thereafter, I contacted a couple well-known members of the LDS academic community to inform them of Metropolitan Jonah's desires, but I don't know if either of the two followed through.

So to all on this board who are in a position to make something happen -- be it known that the highest prelate of the Orthodox Church in America told me, in the presence of witnesses, that he would like to open up a dialogue with the Latter-day Saints...

Well you gotta follow up then dude!. Talk to those you invited to do so and see if they did. Don't just sit there and wait- get off your tuches and do something!

[Spammer]

I wish I could have been at that lecture. I'm a big fan of Barker's work.

[volgadon]

If Metropolitan Hilarion (head of the entire Russian church) is not on board, the majority of Eastern Orthodox worldwide will not be on board (which is not to say that individual Orthodox in any of the churches might not wish for such an interaction between our churches to occur).

I'm pretty sure that it is Patriarch Kirill, succeeding Patriarch Aleksiy II.

[Spammer]

You're right. Met. Hilarious is ROCOR.

[boblloyd91]

I mentioned this in the past but at one point I was thinking about attending both an Orthodox and an LDS congregation while I was in Boise. My wife wasn't too keen on the idea, so it didn't happen. I do lurk at the Orthodox chatroom (Monachos) and have read Frederica Mathewes Green and the "Way of a Pilgrim". I really do appreciate this faith, and feel that like Anakin 7, I would be Orthodox if I wasn't LDS

[volgadon]

You're right. Met. Hilarious is ROCOR.

I actually have a lot more respect for the ROCOR than for the Moscow Patriarchy.

[Alan]

A young man in our ward served his mission in Greece. A lot of British missionaries are being called to Greece right now. It seems every other call is to Greece!

Anyway, he said to me that the Orthodox have the gospel, they lack only the priesthood. Some incorrect doctrines have crept in because of this, though they have been very careful to keep things pure down through the centuries. It is very difficult to convert the Greeks because they already have much of what we have to offer.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Alan

[Spammer]

It might also be difficult because Orthodoxy has been part of Greek identity for nearly two millennia and was the focal point of Greek opposition to 450 years of Turkish rule. As well, the Divine Liturgy is beautiful and moving. Everything is sung and chanted. I recommend that everyone attend one at least once just to see. It's very ancient, mostly unchanged in the order of worship for 1,000 years (give or take) and mostly unchanged in the text of the liturgy itself since the 4th Century. If you want a truly ancient experience, try to find a church without pews. . The presence of pews in some Orthodox churches is a concession to our modern laziness and need for comfort at all times. E.g., most Antiochian and Russian parishes in the States follow the ancient way of no pews and standing during the entire liturgy. There are chairs on the perimeter for the elderly, infirm, and those who can't stand for long periods.

[Hamilton Porter]

• Temples.
  

We call our churches temples. The iconostasis reprepresents the veil and the altar is located behind the veil in the holy of holies, the place where heaven and earth meet. "On earth as it is in heaven". The angel priesthood serves at the altar and the priest serves in the person of our Great High Priest, Jesus.

You friggin' rock! And they kick out non-Orthodox people before they do this, right?

• Some form of deification.
  

Yes. We call this theosis. Many LDS apologists quote our greek Orthodox church fathers to discuss deification and show it is an ancient teaching. It is; it was taught by Jesus to the Apostles, who transmitted it to their bishop successors, whose own bishop successors have preserved the true teaching about theosis within Holy Tradition. Theosis and the LDS teaching of exaltation bear many similarities, though we Orthdox do not believe we will be God, or be exactly like God. He is uncreated; we are created. We have human natures; God is divine and possesses a divine nature (essence). We will always be human, though deified. We will partake of the divine nature in Christ; the divine essence will permeate our very being, illuminating us and turning us into 'gods' (with a small 'g'). But we will still have a human nature, not a divine nature. We will partake of that nature, not have that nature for ourselves. There is only one God, one infinite, divine essence. This is theosis in the Orthodox Church

I hope that helps..

I encountered this scripture the other day that appears to support the Orthodox conception of deification over the LDS one.

John 15:4-5

Abide in me as I abide in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing.

This means we have to be plugged in to the divine essence to be divine, and as soon as we are not, we lose our divinity. I think in the LDS conception, after exaltation we are divine independently?

[Hamilton Porter]

And this- I think you will find it very interesting http://www.copticchu...nfirmation.html

The text continues describing the annointings on the various other body parts.

That's just awesome. It enhances my experience so much when the ordinance is annotated by scripture.

[Hamilton Porter]

You're welcome. I'm glad its helpful. LDS and Orthodox theology are uncannily similar in many respects.

Why do you think this is, considering that Mormonism was birthed into a Protestant, anti-Papal environment? I know a Mormon who converted to Orthodoxy attribute this to Joseph Smith's genius in reading the Bible free of preconceived theological notions.

[Hamilton Porter]

It might also be difficult because Orthodoxy has been part of Greek identity for nearly two millennia and was the focal point of Greek opposition to 450 years of Turkish rule. As well, the Divine Liturgy is beautiful and moving. Everything is sung and chanted. I recommend that everyone attend one at least once just to see. It's very ancient, mostly unchanged in the order of worship for 1,000 years (give or take) and mostly unchanged in the text of the liturgy itself since the 4th Century. If you want a truly ancient experience, try to find a church without pews. . The presence of pews in some Orthodox churches is a concession to our modern laziness and need for comfort at all times. E.g., most Antiochian and Russian parishes in the States follow the ancient way of no pews and standing during the entire liturgy. There are chairs on the perimeter for the elderly, infirm, and those who can't stand for long periods.

There are a lot of Ethiopians where I live. I want to visit one of their services, but was told they're not in English.

[Alan]

You friggin' rock! And they kick out non-Orthodox people before they do this, right?

I encountered this scripture the other day that appears to support the Orthodox conception of deification over the LDS one.

This means we have to be plugged in to the divine essence to be divine, and as soon as we are not, we lose our divinity. I think in the LDS conception, after exaltation we are divine independently?

In my view, no.

We will always be dependent upon our Father. He will give us more independence than we currently have owing to a greater level of trust, but I cannot see us operating entirely independently...... ever.

[teddyaware]

In my view, no.

We will always be dependent upon our Father. He will give us more independence than we currently have owing to a greater level of trust, but I cannot see us operating entirely independently...... ever.

After we are exaltated, our relationship with God the Father will be similar, if not quite nearly identical to the relationship Christ now enjoys with his Father. A hierarchical Patriarchal Order exists in the eternal realms of glory. Therefore, God the Father will always be Christ's Father and God, and God the Father will always be our God; the Patriarchal Order is eternal. Christ's relationship with his Father is the prototype for what our infinite and eternal relationship with Father will be. Paul explains this principle very well:

6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?

7 Thou madest him a little lower than the ^angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:

8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him (believe it or not, this verse is talking about man, not Christ).

9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.

11For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren... (Hebrews 2)

So in the Church of the Firstborn, in the eternal world, Christ will be always be our brother and we will always be his brethren; and God will always be our Father within the organization of the Patriarchal Order. As we read in the Doctrine and Covenants:

19 I (Christ) give unto you these sayings that you may understand and know how to worship, and know what you worship, that you may come unto the Father in my name, and in due time receive of his fulness.

20 For if you keep my commandments you shall receive of his fulness, and be glorified in me as I am in the Father; therefore, I say unto you, you shall receive grace for grace.

21 And now, verily I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn;

22 And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn. (D&C 93)

Meaning, the exalted will be assimilated into the image of Christ and be considered as if they, too, are the Firstborn. And so we read:

7 He that overcometh shall inheritall things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

Edited January 25, 2013 by teddyaware

[Spammer]

In the LDS view, would an exalted being continue to be exalted (i.e., a god) if the Godhead were to suddenly wink out of existence? Maybe this gets at this idea of independence from God after deification. In the Orthodox view, if God ceased to exist not only would deified humans cease to be gods, they would cease to exist, along with everything else that exists.

[teddyaware]

In the LDS view, would an exalted being continue to be exalted (i.e., a god) if the Godhead were to suddenly wink out of existence? Maybe this gets at this idea of independence from God after deification. In the Orthodox view, if God ceased to exist not only would deified humans cease to be gods, they would cease to exist, along with everything else that exists.

For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one (i.e. no longer exist); wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility. (again, nothing at all could exist).

12 Wherefore, it must needs have been created for a thing of naught; wherefore there would have been no purpose in the end of its creation. Wherefore, this thing must needs destroy the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes, and also the power, and the mercy, and the justice of God.

13 And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away.

Therefore, theoretically speaking, if our God ceased to be God, all things would vanish away and no longer have an existence. So this means that those who progress to a state of apotheosis are utterly dependent upon their God to remain in that state. If otherwise, those so deified would vanish into non-existence.

In the following quotation from the Gospel of John, the Savior explains how this principle of utter dependency on the divine works in our lives:

1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

2 Every branch (us) in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.

3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.

4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.

5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. (John 15)

In the next quotation, the Savior explains how the principle of dependency on the divine operated within his own life:

8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14)

Jesus was dependent on his Father, as we are dependent on Christ and the Father.

Edited January 25, 2013 by teddyaware

[Hamilton Porter]

And one more similarity: Orthodox also interpret Gen. 1:26-27 to mean physical image, although they see this as referring to the Son and not Father.

[teddyaware]

And one more similarity: Orthodox also interpret Gen. 1:26-27 to mean physical image, although they see this as referring to the Son and not Father.

But once our Orthodox brethren interpret Genesis 1:26-27 to mean man was created after the physical image of God the Son, all bets are off when it comes to the possibilities as to what the true nature of God the Father might be. The reason why this doctrinal step is a 'game changer' is because the Bible teaches us God the Son is still verily God, even though he possesses a tangible, resurrected body of flesh and bone; a tangible resurrected body which is, according to the creeds of historical Christianity, a limiting factor that cannot (supposedly) be applied to an unchangeable God who is by very nature without any limitations. Yet Paul tells us:

"For in him (Christ) dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." (Colossians 2:9)

So, if having a tangible physical body does not in any way diminish from the fulness of the divinity that exists within God the Son, why would having a similarly glorified tangible body in any way diminish from the fulness of the divinity that exists within God the Father? In fact, I would say that the glorified, resurrected body of Christ is, in reality, an enhancing factor to his divinity -- or at very least an enhancement to the enjoyment of his divinity.

After all, if all the attributes of divine perfection that exist within the Father and the Son are fully equal, it would seem, logically speaking, that the Son might enjoy an advantage over the Father. Why? Because if, according to the doctrines of historical Christianity, the only real difference existing between God the Father and God the Son is that God the Father is a disembodied Spirit, while God the Son is a Spirit also, but is additionally enrobed within a glorious, tangible body of flesh and bone -- then Christ's advantage over the person of the Father would lie in the fact that his glorious body would enable him to fully enjoy his divinity as a Spirit, while simultaneously being able to dwell within the physical realm, able to intimately interact with everything that exists within that realm. Christ's physical body would enable him to smile upon us, dry our tears, hold our hand and even place us within the eternal comfort and warmth of his holy embrace. This is an advantage indeed!

Edited February 2, 2013 by teddyaware