The Reformation & the Eastern Church

[zsmcd]

What affect did the Protestant Reformation have on the Eastern Church? Any at all?

i.e. are there any examples/stories of the theology of the Reformation making its way into the East, or of any significant churches/teachers in the East taking on the Protestant positions?

 

[RamistThomist]

Early Lutherans met with the Patriarch but nothing came of it. One Patriarch of Constantinople, Cyril Lukaris, was an anti-Filioque Calvinist who was later condemned by the East. As a general rule there wasn't much interaction really until Thomas Torrance. Greek and Slavic lands outside Russia were under Ottoman slavery (usually propped up by Britain) and it wasn't until 1918 did they get any breathing room.

When Russian emigres came to America after communism in the 50s and Greeks in the 60s, there was some dialogue, but usually between liberal Reformed and the Greeks (who are also militantly liberal politically, and probably Freemasons as well; the Phanariot is sick and rotten).

There was a local council in Jerusalem in the 1670s or 80s under Peter Moghila (I think I got the timeline right) that formally condemned Calvinism.

Now, when the Satanist Peter the Great came to power, he modeled his state after the Lutheran state church, but that is quite anti-Reformed.

 

[Dachaser]

The eastern church looks at the Incarnation and the Atonement in different ways still, correct?

 

[RamistThomist]

The eastern church looks at the Incarnation and the Atonement in different ways still, correct?

More so atonement than Incarnation. They will say that Logos assumed the universal of human nature and Jesus died for human nature and not for an individual human.

 

[Bill The Baptist]

The eastern church looks at the Incarnation and the Atonement in different ways still, correct?

More so atonement than Incarnation. They will say that Logos assumed the universal of human nature and Jesus died for human nature and not for an individual human.

They would also view the incarnation as very transformative in nature. for example, I have heard many EO's argue that images of God are now permitted because God became man.

 

[Dachaser]

They deny Penal Substitionary atonement then, correct?
And their views on His humanity different, as elevation of humanity now?

 

[MichaelNZ]

The Eastern Orthodox deny the penal substitution theory of the Atonement and believe rather that Christ died to destroy death and heal humanity. They shy away from the legal metaphor (Christ died to pay our debt) and instead use a medical metaphor (Christ came to heal humanity).

The Eastern Orthodox church has never had a Reformation and as far as I know has no decree of any Ecumenical Council officially stating that salvation is not by faith alone (although that is what they believe and teach).

 

[Warren]

Right. Salvation is by faith and works. Not by faith alone. That's what they'd say, at least.

 

[arapahoepark]

The Eastern Orthodox deny the penal substitution theory of the Atonement and believe rather that Christ died to destroy death and heal humanity. They shy away from the legal metaphor (Christ died to pay our debt) and instead use a medical metaphor (Christ came to heal humanity).

The Eastern Orthodox church has never had a Reformation and as far as I know has no decree of any Ecumenical Council officially stating that salvation is not by faith alone (although that is what they believe and teach).

Well Cyril Lucarius was deposed and I believe there were councils convened shortly thereafter repudiating his theology.

 

[Dachaser]

So they would be closer to Catholic views than Reformed?

 

[RamistThomist]

They deny Penal Substitionary atonement then, correct?
And their views on His humanity different, as elevation of humanity now?

Yes. As to "how" they view the deified humanity, that's tricky. They are very clear that you don't become the uncreated deity. On the other hand, I am not sure how their view is an advance on glorification as we understand it.

 

[RamistThomist]

So they would be closer to Catholic views than Reformed?

Depends on what issue. We are closer to Rome on doctrine of God than they are. Yet, we can appreciate some of their criticisms of the papacy. I recommend Robert Letham's Through Western Eyes.

 

[RamistThomist]

The eastern church looks at the Incarnation and the Atonement in different ways still, correct?

More so atonement than Incarnation. They will say that Logos assumed the universal of human nature and Jesus died for human nature and not for an individual human.

They would also view the incarnation as very transformative in nature. for example, I have heard many EO's argue that images of God are now permitted because God became man.

Images of Jesus are permitted on their gloss, not God the Father/Holy Spirit.

 

[Bill The Baptist]

So they would be closer to Catholic views than Reformed?

In some ways yes, in other ways no. The Orthodox deny things like papal infallibility and the immaculate conception of Mary, but also have some odd views on the atonement and sin. Overall, they are much closer to the RC than to the reformed.

 

[RamistThomist]

So they would be closer to Catholic views than Reformed?

In some ways yes, in other ways no. The Orthodox deny things like papal infallibility and the immaculate conception of Mary, but also have some odd views on the atonement and sin. Overall, they are much closer to the RC than to the reformed.

But if you ever debate converts to EO you will notice that many blame everything on Augustine.

 

[Bill The Baptist]

The eastern church looks at the Incarnation and the Atonement in different ways still, correct?

More so atonement than Incarnation. They will say that Logos assumed the universal of human nature and Jesus died for human nature and not for an individual human.

They would also view the incarnation as very transformative in nature. for example, I have heard many EO's argue that images of God are now permitted because God became man.

Images of Jesus are permitted on their gloss, not God the Father/Holy Spirit.

Correct. I should have been more clear. I'm not sure you could have a meaningful image of God the father or the Holy Spirit anyway.

 

[Stope]

The Eastern Orthodox ... shy away from the legal metaphor (Christ died to pay our debt) and instead use a medical metaphor (Christ came to heal humanity).

Kind of sounds like N.T. Wright's (and Time Keller's variation of) "putting things to right" (which I actually agree is PART of the goal)

 

[RamistThomist]

The Eastern Orthodox ... shy away from the legal metaphor (Christ died to pay our debt) and instead use a medical metaphor (Christ came to heal humanity).

Kind of sounds like N.T. Wright's (and Time Keller's variation of) "putting things to right" (which I actually agree is PART of the goal)

Sort of. The more astute EO apologists pull back on Wright. They think he is too Western on things like "glory" and "righteousness."

 

[zsmcd]

One Patriarch of Constantinople, Cyril Lukaris, was an anti-Filioque Calvinist who was later condemned by the East.

Very interesting, I was not aware of this. Are there any works of his or biographies on him that are worth the read?

By the way, did I use the right type of affect vs effect in the OP?

 

[Warren]

There was a systematic theology in a confession attributed to him.

 

[arapahoepark]

One Patriarch of Constantinople, Cyril Lukaris, was an anti-Filioque Calvinist who was later condemned by the East.

Very interesting, I was not aware of this. Are there any works of his or biographies on him that are worth the read?

By the way, did I use the right type of affect vs effect in the OP?

One is called The Protestant Patriarch.

 

[Dachaser]

Do they see us now having our own humanity glorified and risen as Jesus'?

 

[Dachaser]

They still have a Sacramental system of salvation though, so would not hold toReformed views of faith alone Grace alone?

 

[Dachaser]

They would then have another wayto get saved, apart from grace alone/faithalone?
And they have their own version of the Pope, correct?

 

[Dachaser]

As do many other who do not hold to the views of Calvinists/Reformed!

 

[Dachaser]

They would hold to the Christ is Victor over forces of evil, that He now has overcome the Curse etc?

 

[RamistThomist]

They would hold to the Christ is Victor over forces of evil, that He now has overcome the Curse etc?

Most fathers would. Some parallels with Luther.

 

[RamistThomist]

And they have their own version of the Pope, correct?

No. Each jurisdiction is ultimately headed by a "Patriarch." The bishop of Rome used to be a Patriarch of sorts. The Patriarch has zero official political power (whereas the pope is a literal head of state). He is not infallible (nor does he pretend to be). The pyramid sort of looks like this:

Patriarch; traditionally, there were five (head of a large region; for example, the Patriarch of Constantinople is head of the Greek-speaking churches)
Metropolitan (theoretically, head of a smaller region, but this got complicated when everyone came to America)
Archbishop
Bishop
Priest

 

[RamistThomist]

Do they see us now having our own humanity glorified and risen as Jesus'?

They would say that is what you should aim for. They make a difference between the "image of God" and the likeness of God, whereas I believe the Hebrew sees them synonymously. They would say we are all created in the image of God but we have to realize the likeness via the sacraments, asceticism, etc.

 

[Dachaser]

John Calvin held to the Substitutionary view though, as did the majority of the reformers, correct?