Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)

Forum Quick Jump

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 5/25/2010 8:55 AM (GMT -6)

It's interesting that one can find Catholic open theists (ordained clergy, not just lay folk) but no Eastern Orthodox who are open theists. Given that the ecumenical creeds embraced by the Orthodox are also embraced by Catholics, and given the same "basic" function of tradition within both, what is it about Catholicism that makes it possible for their clergy to be open theists while (I'm guessing) there's no way in Hades an Orthodox priest would ever embrace the view?

Interesting.

Tom

KIXYTΘEMTA

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 5/25/2010 6:47 PM (GMT -6)

Accept my prejudice for the sake of a foundation for asking a question. OK?

Q: what in rc has something missing or out of place; or, EO has what assumed?

OR... how might the Q better be asked?

(o)

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 5/25/2010 8:09 PM (GMT -6)

Not following ya B. I suppose your question IS my question. What's the difference between the two that might account for a much broader diversity of views in RC than in EO?

Tom

KIXYTΘEMTA

Asher
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 477

Posted 5/25/2010 8:48 PM (GMT -6)

I think what B is saying, Tom, is that there is a flaw in the Roman Catholic system of thought that allows them to embrace open theism...whereas, with no flaw, the Orthodox see through the flim-flammery of open theism.

If I misunderstood you B, I apologize.

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 5/25/2010 10:17 PM (GMT -6)

Ah, I see. Well, Bruce, could you locate the RC flaws for me?

Tom

KIXYTΘEMTA

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 5/26/2010 7:29 AM (GMT -6)

Also, rc has the concept of 'doctrinal development' which allowa for papal infalability declaration.

(o)

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 5/26/2010 8:35 AM (GMT -6)

But the EO has the consensus of (living) fathers. Tradition, in the EO, is an ongoing, growing, living thing too. Were the vast majority of living fathers were to convene in agreement on some dogma, it would be so. So the EO essentially can "develop"--heck, it HAS developed. They just don't do it LIKE the RC.

There's something else...something I can't put my finger on...which explains the difference. Don't know. Maybe you're right. Maybe the RC having papal infallibility and the EO not having that is what explains it. I don't know.

Tom

KIXYTΘEMTA

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 5/28/2010 12:55 PM (GMT -6)

Tom, it took me a while to grasp the implications of your remark about pap-inpal...

But, i think you are right. P-i and doctrinal development are cut from the same cloth.

But I'll argue that EO does not work baackward. I agree with their self-statement that from Basel to Palamas the core has been the same.

And

(o)

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 12:39 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual