@OrdinariateUSA@ruckusofantioch in my experience, Catholic monastics were either scrupulous and hyper-legalistic Thomists or they were into Zen Buddhism or something since their own traditions had been stripped of its depth (this obviously isn't true in every case)
@OrdinariateUSA@ruckusofantioch I'm the opposite of an OrthoBro lol. It's true though! Don't take it from me, here's a former Benedictine monk who's spot on https://t.co/pZwYG7S8og
@ruckusofantioch Which may sound harsh. I've met a lot of lovely RC friars and nuns (far more Christian than I am, frankly), BUT it's qualitatively different than EO monasticism (and this is coming from someone who leans ecumenist over triumphalist!)
@ruckusofantioch I heard a former RC say that modern RC monasticism is basically gays, scrupulous women, and guys who like reading, whereas EO monasticism is still monastic. I'm also former RC, I told this to all my ex-RC (now EO) friends and they all laughed because we've all experienced this
@USATrackAIPAC@Tricknologist_ (3/3) Not every detail of a regional synod is received over time. The historical context changes, and the Holy Spirit cements universal dogma through the living memory of the Church.
@USATrackAIPAC I just found the church fathers, while not exactly univocal theologically, held to an ecclesiology more closely resembling EO than branch theory, which is why I chose the mess that is EO over the mess that is Anglicanism.
@USATrackAIPAC I'm sure you're familiar with "reception theory" as opposed to the way RCs claim dogma works. You may say reception theory is all cope and I can understand your stance. It can get messy. But, as you originally stated, the early church was messy, just as EO ecclesiology is today.
@USATrackAIPAC What's the proof of this? Ask ten Orthodox if it's binding and you'll get eleven answers. Ask them about, lets say, Ephesus or the Palamite synods and everyone will affirm them no question.
@USATrackAIPAC Not trying to argue (love me some Anglicanism) but 1672 isn't binding in the same way that the first 7 councils are. Or even Const 879, Trullo, or the Palamite synods for that matter. Its "softly" binding in that what's been received is just a general rejection of Calvinism.