some thoughts on Catholicism and Orthodoxy

SDG here. Following up on my post on the heretical “or” and the Catholic “and”, in which I argued that theological error is always essentially fragmentary and partial while truth is always catholic, integral, here are some specific thoughts on Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

This came up because a Protestant friend who is being drawn toward Orthodoxy recently wrote the following in an exchange with me:

…to me it seems like Catholicism broke itself off from Orthodoxy and set itself up as the central authority and is now telling the Orthodox churches that they can keep on doing what they do so long as they submit to the Pope, while Evangelicals broke off from Catholic and set up the Bible (and a specific way of interpreting the Bible) as the central authority are and are now telling both Catholic and Orthodox churches that they can keep on doing what they do so long as they submit to (the Evangelical understanding of) scripture…

Here’s the first part of my reply:

No, no, no.

You’ve got it backwards. You’re quite right on the one hand that Catholicism says to Orthodoxy something that, for the sake of discussion, we can roughly approximate as “You can keep on doing what you do so long as you submit to the Pope.” That’s because what is wrong with Orthodoxy from a Catholic perspective is fundamentally not that they do or believe anything positively wrong (that is, that they have any fundamental, positive erroneous beliefs or practices), but that there is something fundamental and positive that is missing in their faith and praxis. So, add the missing something to what they do and say now and everything will be all right.

But it’s meaningless words to try to put in the mouth of Protestantism a parallel message to Catholics and Orthodox to the effect that “You can keep on doing what you do so long as you submit to (the Evangelical understanding of) scripture,” since what is wrong with Catholicism and Orthodoxy from a Protestant perspective is precisely that there ARE important elements of what we do and practice that are positively wrong according to the Evangelical understanding of scripture.

In other words, for Catholics and Orthodox to “submit to (the Evangelical understanding of) scripture” would not remotely allow us to “keep on doing what we do,” in anything like the sense that the Orthodox submitting to the Pope would allow them to “keep on doing what they do.” On the contrary, it would require us to cease and desist from a great deal of positive and vital Catholic/Orthodox belief and praxis — our eucharistic sacrifice, our episcopal succession of apostolic authority, our ministerial priesthood, our prayers to saints, our veneration of Mary and unscriptural belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity and heavenly queenship, etc.

There’s no parallel ceasing and desisting that Catholicism demands of Orthodoxy. On the contrary, it is Orthodoxy that demands that Catholicism cease and desist in its claims regarding the authority of the papal office, just as Protestantism demands that Catholicism and Orthodoxy cease and desist their claims regarding the authority of the councils and the traditions.

I notice that you don’t paraphrase the message of Orthodoxy to Catholicism. Does it not take essentially the following form? “You must submit to (the Orthodox understanding of) sacred tradition and the seven councils. We see that you acknowledge in principle the authority of sacred tradition and the councils, but you interpret them wrongly, and wrongly claim additional authority (i.e., the papacy) as your basis for doing so. You must stop pretending to have some additional authority, return only to the tradition and the councils, interpret them as we do, and do and profess only what (we have said all along) is compatible with them.”

And does that not take precisely the same form as the message of Protestantism to both Orthodoxy and Catholicism? “You must submit to (the Evangelical understanding of) sacred scripture. We see that you acknowledge in principle the authority of the sacred scriptures, but you interpret them wrongly, and wrongly claim additional authority (i.e., sacred tradition and the councils) as your basis for doing so. You must stop pretending to have some additional authority, return only to the scriptures, interpret them as we do, and do and profess only what (we have said all along) is compatible with them.”

But now let’s look at things the other way round. What’s the message of Orthodoxy and Catholicism to Protestantism? “Your rule of faith is incomplete. You go only by the scriptures as you understand them, when the scriptures themselves, rightly understood, enjoin to you accept the authority of the bishops, of the councils, of sacred tradition. You err because you interpret your sources not in accordance with right authority. You must accept an authority you now reject per se and in principle, and then you will interpret the scriptures rightly.”

Compare to the message of Catholicism to Orthodoxy: “Your rule of faith is incomplete. You go by the councils and traditions as you understand them, when the councils and traditions themselves, rightly understood, enjoin to you accept the authority of the successor to St. Peter, the Bishop of Rome. You err because you interpret your sources not in accordance with right authority. You must accept an authority you now reject per se and in principle, and then you will interpret the councils and traditions rightly.”

Clearly, there is a continuum here from Catholicism to Orthodoxy to Protestantism. And we could extend it thus:

1. Catholicism (accepts Old and New Testaments, sacred tradition and councils, apostolic succession of bishops, Petrine succession of popes)
2. Orthodoxy (accepts Old and New Testaments, sacred tradition and councils, apostolic succession of bishops)
3. Protestantism (accepts Old and New Testaments)
4. Pharisaical Judaism (accepts Old Testament)
5. Saduccees (accepted only the five books of Moses)
6. Deists (accept no divine revelation)

And of course everyone lower on the list believes that those higher on the list have added false authority to true, and interpret the true wrongly on the basis of the false, while those higher on the list believe that those lower on the list have rejected or failed to accept part of true authority, and therefore fail to understand fully even what they have.

Or look at it this way:

1. Catholicism (professes one God in Three Persons who has spoken through the law and the prophets; God made man for our redemption; the seven sacraments; the apostolic succession and the priesthood; the Petrine office of the bishop of Rome)
2. Orthodoxy (professes one God in Three Persons who has spoken through the law and the prophets; God made man for our redemption; the seven sacraments; the apostolic succession and the priesthood)
3. Protestantism (professes one God in Three Persons who has spoken through the law and the prophets; God made man for our redemption)
4. Pharisaical Judaism (professes one God who has spoken through the law and the prophets)
5. Saduccees (professed one God who has spoken through the law)
6. Deists (profess one God)

As I said, it’s not hard to see which sets of beliefs are more comprehensive, more catholic — which include and expand upon the basic positive elements of the others, and which leave things out.

Author: Jimmy Akin

Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live." View all posts by Jimmy Akin