What are the differences between Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism?

Question

Please be specific. This is for a report.

Answer 1

Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox are Catholic
Protestants are heretics

Answer 2

Ok, from me you get the "Reader's Digest Condensed Version". The whole history thing is way too long to type here!

Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodox Catholicism have a lot in common. They are both ancient forms of Christianity, practicing a lot of the same rituals, and (importantly) holding to Apostolic Succession. The head of each church is known as a Patriarch; the Patriarch of the RC church is commonly known as the Pope.

There were a number of problems between the Eastern and Western (Latin) Christians churches in the first 1,000 years of Christianity, notably due to differences in culture and language, but there were political problems as well. These difficulties grew to the point of the Great Schism of 1054 AD, when the patriarchs of Rome and Constantinople excommunicated each other.

In the last century, there have been a number of olive branches passed between the two groups, and a reconciliation is hoped for by many.

The Protestant Reformation is only about 500 years old. The Latin (Western Catholic) Church had foundered into a lot of corrupt practices, and teaching had foundered as well. There were many cries for reform, but often the politics of the church made reform undesirable. Some people (like the Lutherans, Baptists, and others) felt it was easier to split away from Catholicism completely, in order to worship God according to the Scriptures (and not necessarily in line with Church Customs). From these men and their followers, we have the numerous Protestant denominations; still Christian, but not practicing apostolic succession.

A good place to start is NewAdvent.org, the Catholic online encyclopedia. You will find a more in-depth explanation of the Great Schism there; the Protestant Reformation is fairly common knowledge.

Answer 3

A long time ago, all Christian religions (Protestantism, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheranism,etc.) Used 2 belong 2 the Catholic Church until the Schism of 1054, when the Eastern & Western Churches lost contact w/each other. The Western Church added a new sentence 2 the Nicene Creed; Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father & Son. FYI, Eastern Orthodox is still considered Catholic.
& Luteranism started when Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses on the door of his Church. He opposed abuses within the Church, especially the abuses of indulgences.
Protestanism (???) Idk I forgot.

Answer 4

The person above left off protestants. They differentiate themselves from Catholicism in many ways. First, there is no pope. Most importantly, however, they believe salvation comes through faith in Jesus, and not through doing acts, however good they may be. Luther was the pioneer in this detachment. You wil notice also that in a protestant church there are very few symbols, whereas the Catholic church is filled with images, icons, statutes, and the aroma of incense. Some protestants (not all) believe that cathoics are not christian because the rituals they perform so closely resemble pagan rituals. Finally, protestants do not beleive that the bread and wine become Jesus at communion (transubstantiation) whereas Catholics do.

Answer 5

The major difference between the Romans Catholic institution and the Eastern Orthodox is that the latter rejects the unBiblical perpetuated Petrne papacy of Rome, which is more derived from from the Romans Empire in which she found herself, and took upon much of her means.
http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/papalpresumption.html

Yet neither church are Biblical New Testament churches, as they reject Bible is the ultimate authority and exalt their ecclesiastical authority and church tradition over it, and thus preach and practice a critically different faith than that of the Bible, with many unBiblical doctrines from paedo-baptism to prayer to the dead. And most critically, their members most typically believe that their good deeds and the power of the church will help save them, rather than utter trust in Christ and His blood to save sinners destitute of any means whereby they may escape Hell and gain Heaven.

There are are other minor divisions within Rome such as the sedevacantists, and there would be more formal divisions if Catholics were divided according to what they actually believed, and if both Rome and her attendees were more committed to doctrinal purity, but practically that is not made much of an issue. As long as you die in her arms she is basically satisfied, so that abortion promoting politicians need not fear getting less than a glorious send off at their funerals.

Real Protestantism holds the Bible is the ultimate authority, and preach the Biblical essentials of the faith (Divine inspiration of Scripture, virgin birth, deity of Christ, salvation by grace, eternality of Hell and Heaven, etc.) and apostolic "gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20:24), of the necessity of the new birth thru direct "repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 20:21), and are different from churches and cults who deviate from essential doctrines and who foster hope in ones self and or organization to gain eternal life.

The have many divisions, but aside from cults, their unity in the essential gospel and key doctrines is far greater quality than the unity around error or Cathlocism.

The largest denomination within Protestantism are the Southern Baptists, followed by the Methodist church.
http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html

See below for some more interesting stats on this:
http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html

But most important, may you give your sins and life to Christ who died for you and rose again.

Answer 6

One difference:

Roman Catholics view the Bishop of the See of Rome (the Pope) as the spiritual leader of the entire Church.

East Orthodox congregations have historically recognized five See's and their bishops/ partriarchs -- Rome, Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Constantinople.

Protestants do not recognize such over-arching leaders.

EDIT: To say "Every Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church" is a Catholic teaching. It is not the understanding of the Orthodox, who, in the earliest centuries of the Church were the most numerous and most philosophically well-educated members of Christendom.
.

Answer 7

Sedevacantist Singles

Answer 8

Too many differences to name.

Answer 9

Slight degrees of stupidity

Answer 10

Copied and pasted from http://www.catholic.com/library/eastern_orthodoxy.asp

This is our perspective.

Eastern Orthodoxy


One of the most tragic divisions within Christianity is the one between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches. Both have valid holy orders and apostolic succession through the episcopacy, both celebrate the same sacraments, both believe almost exactly the same theology, and both proclaim the same faith in Christ. So, why the division? What caused the division?


Emperor vs. Patriarch



After the western Roman Empire collapsed in A.D. 476, the eastern half continued under the title of the Byzantine Empire and was headquartered in Constantinople. The patriarch of that city had jurisdiction over the patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, and served under the emperor, who ruled those lands with military might. In the East, the emperor wielded tremendous influence in church affairs. Some emperors even claimed to be equal in authority to the twelve apostles, and as such claimed to have the power to appoint the patriarch of Constantinople. Although the two offices were legally autonomous, in practice the patriarch served at the emperor’s pleasure. Many patriarchs of Constantinople were good and holy bishops who ruled well and resisted imperial encroachments on church matters, but it is difficult to withstand the designs of power-hungry or meddlesome emperors with armed soldiers at their disposal.

The patriarch often attempted to bolster his position in the universal Church to give himself more leverage in dealing with the emperor, and this usually brought him into conflict with Rome.

During the years of conflict between East and West, the Roman pontiff remained firm, defending the Catholic faith against heresies and unruly or immoral secular powers, especially the Byzantine emperor. The first conflict came when Emperor Constantius appointed an Arian heretic as patriarch. Pope Julian excommunicated the patriarch in 343, and Constantinople remained in schism until John Chrysostom assumed the patriarchate in 398.

Ironically, in the Church’s eighth-century struggle against the Iconoclastic heresy (which sought to eliminate all sacred images), it was the pope and the Western bishops mainly who fought for the Catholic practice of venerating icons, which is still very much a part of Orthodox liturgy and spirituality. The patriarch of Constantinople sided with the heretical, iconoclastic emperors.


1054 and All That



The Norman conquest of southern Italy helped touch off the Great Schism between Eastern and Western Christendom. When the Catholic Normans took over the Byzantine-Rite Greek colonies in southern Italy, they compelled the Greek communities there to adopt the Latin-Rite custom of using unleavened bread for the Eucharist. This caused great aggravation among the Greek Catholics because it went against their ancient custom of using leavened bread.

In response, Patriarch Cerularius ordered all of the Latin-Rite communities in Constantinople to conform to the Eastern practice of using leavened bread. You can imagine the uproar that ensued. The Latins refused, so the patriarch closed their churches and sent a hostile letter to Pope Leo IX.

What followed next was a tragedy of errors. In an attempt to quell the disturbance, the pope sent a three-man delegation, led by Cardinal Humbert, to visit Patriarch Cerularius, but matters worsened. The legates presented the patriarch with the pope’s reply to his charges. Both sides managed to infuriate each other over diplomatic courtesies, and when the smoke cleared, a serious rift had developed. This was not, however, the actual break between the two communions. It’s a popular myth that the schism dates to the year 1054 and that the pope and the patriarch excommunicated each other at that time, but they did not.

Orthodox bishop Kallistos Ware (formerly Timothy Ware) writes, "The choice of Cardinal Humbert was unfortunate, for both he and Cerularius were men of stiff and intransigent temper. . . . After [an initial, unfriendly encounter] the patriarch refused to have further dealings with the legates. Eventually Humbert lost patience, and laid a bull of excommunication against Cerularius on the altar of the Church of the Holy Wisdom. . . . Cerularius and his synod retaliated by anathematizing Humbert (but not the Roman Church as such)" (The Orthodox Church, 67).

The New Catholic Encyclopedia says, "The consummation of the schism is generally dated from the year 1054, when this unfortunate sequence of events took place. This conclusion, however, is not correct, because in the bull composed by Humbert, only Patriarch Cerularius was excommunicated. The validity of the bull is questioned because Pope Leo IX was already dead at that time. On the other side, the Byzantine synod excommunicated only the legates and abstained from any attack on the pope or the Latin Church."

There was no single event that marked the schism, but rather a sliding into and out of schism during a period of several centuries, punctuated with temporary reconciliations. The East’s final break with Rome did not come until the 1450s.


Attempts at Reconciliation



"Even after 1054 friendly relations between East and West continued. The two parts of Christendom were not yet conscious of a great gulf of separation between them. . . . The dispute remained something of which ordinary Christians in East and West were largely unaware" (Ware, 67).

This changed when the Byzantine Empire collapsed suddenly in 1453. A soldier forgot to lock one of the gates of the fortified city of Constantinople, and the Turks sacked the city. With the Turks in control of the capital city, the rest of the empire crumbled quickly. Under pressure from Muslims, most of the Eastern churches repudiated their union with Rome, and this is the split that persists to this day. The current Eastern Orthodox communion dates from the 1450s, making it a mere six decades older than the Protestant Reformation.


Eastern Fragmentation



Two subsequent events, one external, the other internal, reduced the patriarch of Constantinople’s status to nearly that of a figurehead. The sword of Islam gave military protection to the center of the Eastern Orthodox world, but at a high price. The Muslim sultan sold the office of patriarch to the highest bidder and changed the occupants often to keep the money rolling in. From 1453 to 1923, the Turkish sultans deposed 105 out of the 159 patriarchs. Six were murdered, and only 21 died of natural causes while in office.

Another blow that weakened the patriarch’s authority came from Russia. Ivan the Great assumed the title of "Czar" (Russian for "Caesar"). Moscow was then called the "third Rome," and the Czar tried to assume the role of protector for Eastern Christianity.

With the collapse of the patriarchal system, the Eastern church lost its center and fragmented along national lines. Russia claimed independence from the patriarch of Constantinople in 1589, the first nation to do this. Other ethnic and regional splintering quickly followed, and today there are eleven independent Orthodox churches. The Russian Orthodox church dominates contemporary Eastern Orthodoxy, representing seven-eighths of the total number of Orthodox Christians.


The Filioque Problem



One theological disagreement has to do with the Latin compound word filioque ("and the Son") which was added to the Nicene Creed by Spanish Catholic bishops around the end of the sixth century. With this addition, the creed says that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son." Without the addition, it says the Spirit proceeds from the Father.

Eastern Orthodox have traditionally challenged this, either saying that the doctrine is inaccurate or, for those who believe that it is accurate, that the pope had no authority to insert this word into the creed (though it was later affirmed by an ecumenical council).

Many today, both Orthodox and Catholics, believe this controversy was a tempest in a teapot. The doctrine that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son as well as the Father is intimated in Scripture and present in the earliest Church Fathers. Controversy over it only arose again after the Eastern churches repudiated their union with Rome under pressure from the Muslims.

Eastern Orthodox often refer to the Holy Spirit proceeding from "the Father through the Son," which can be equivalent to the Catholic formula "from the Father and the Son." Since everything the Son has is from the Father, if the Spirit proceeds from the Son, then the Son can only be spoken of as one through whom the Spirit received what he has from the Father, the ultimate principle of the Godhead. Because the formulas are equivalent, the Catechism of the Catholic Church notes: "This legitimate complementarity, provided it does not become rigid, does not affect the identity of faith in the reality of the same mystery confessed" (CCC 248).

Today there is every hope that the equivalence of the two formulas can be formally recognized by all parties and that the filioque controversy can be resolved.


The Councils



A more substantive disagreement between Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox concerns the role of the pope and the ecumenical councils in the Church. Both sides agree that ecumenical councils have the ability to infallibly define doctrines, but a question arises concerning which councils are ecumenical.

The Eastern Orthodox communion bases its teachings on Scripture and "the seven ecumenical councils"—I Nicaea (325), I Constantinople (381), Ephesus (431), Chalcedon (451), II Constantinople (553), III Constantinople (680), and II Nicaea (787). Catholics recognize these as the first seven ecumenical councils, but not the only seven.

While Catholics recognize an ensuing series of ecumenical councils, leading up to Vatican II, which closed in 1965, the Eastern Orthodox say there have been no ecumenical councils since 787, and no teaching after II Nicaea is accepted as of universal authority.

One of the reasons the Eastern Orthodox do not claim to have had any ecumenical councils since II Nicaea is that they have been unable to agree on which councils are ecumenical. In Orthodox circles, the test for whether a council is ecumenical is whether it is "accepted by the church" as such. But that test is unworkable: Any disputants who are unhappy with a council’s result can point to their own disagreement with it as evidence that the church has not accepted it as ecumenical, and it therefore has no authority.


The Pope’s Authority



Since the Eastern schism began, the Orthodox have generally claimed that the pope has only a primacy of honor among the bishops of the world, not a primacy of authority. But the concept of a primacy of honor without a corresponding authority cannot be derived from the Bible. At every juncture where Jesus speaks of Peter’s relation to the other apostles, he emphasizes Peter’s special mission to them and not simply his place of honor among them.

In Matthew 16:19, Jesus gives Peter "the keys to the kingdom" and the power to bind and loose. While the latter is later given to the other apostles (Matt. 18:18), the former is not. In Luke 22:28–32, Jesus assures the apostles that they all have authority, but then he singles out Peter, conferring upon him a special pastoral authority over the other disciples which he is to exercise by strengthening their faith (22:31–32).

In John 21:15–17, with only the other disciples present (cf. John 21:2), Jesus asks Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?"—in other words, is Peter more devoted to him than the other disciples? When Peter responds that he is, Jesus instructs him: "Feed my lambs" (22:15). Thus we see Jesus describing the other disciples, the only other people who are present, the ones whom Jesus refers to as "these," as part of the lambs that he instructs Peter to feed, giving him the role of pastor (shepherd) over them. Again, a reference to Peter having more than merely a primacy of honor with respect to the other apostles, but a primacy of pastoral discipline as well.


Ecumenical Prospects



While Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are separate for the moment, what unites us is still far greater than what divides us, and there are abundant reasons for optimism regarding reconciliation in the future. Over the last several decades, there has been a marked lessening of tensions and overcoming of long-standing hostilities.

In 1965, Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras I of Constantinople lifted mutual excommunications dating from the eleventh century, and in 1995, Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople concelebrated the Eucharist together. John Paul II, the first Slavic pope, has made the reconciliation of Eastern and Western Christendom a special theme of his pontificate, and he has released a large number of documents and addresses honoring the contributions of Eastern Christendom and seeking to promote unity between Catholics and Orthodox.

It is again becoming possible to envision a time when the two communions will be united and, by the power of the Holy Spirit, fulfill their duty in bringing about Christ’s solemn desire and command "that they may be one" (John 17:11).